Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-04-08 Daily Xml

Contents

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE

The Hon. DAVID WINDERLICH (15:10): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Mineral Resources Development, representing the Attorney-General, a question about restorative justice.

Leave granted.

The Hon. DAVID WINDERLICH: In September last year Premier Mike Rann, while launching the Repay SA initiative in Elizabeth, said that the program to which the state government had committed $543,000 'is restorative justice in action'. Monsignor David Cappo, the Commissioner for Social Inclusion, has also said:

Restorative justice was a theme that I heard over and over again and one that makes strong sense to me...Restitution and reparation to the community are fundamental to the conciliation process...Looking to international research there is a growing body of evidence to support the benefit that such an approach has on reducing the long-term cost that youth crime poses to the community. Equally as important, this type of approach provides young people with an opportunity to see things differently and provides them with new-found hope for their future.

However, it appears that the Attorney-General is setting his own policy agenda. He is reported to have said at a Uniting Church forum on prison overcrowding in February that the principles of restorative justice were in opposition to the tough law and order policies of the Rann government. My questions to the minister are:

1. Does the Attorney-General share the commitment of the Premier and commissioner David Cappo to restorative justice?

2. Has the Attorney-General denied any application for funding for restorative justice projects?

3. Has the Attorney-General prevented any commonwealth funded restorative justice projects from going ahead in South Australia?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:12): I will refer those questions to the Attorney-General for his response. However, rather than putting words into the mouth of the Attorney-General, if the Attorney said something, the honourable member could perhaps at least quote his words in their proper context rather than just make some interpretation of what he said. I do not necessarily accept from the question as it was put that that accurately reflects the Attorney's views, but I will leave it up to the Attorney to explain himself.