Join the Abolition Collective to challenge the proposed new laws of the Baillieu Government, which will lead to more people in prison. More people in prison does not result in a safer community. Help us show the new government that there are people who will fight these changes.
Why are we having this action?
The new Liberal-National Government is about to make huge changes to sentencing in Victoria, which will ultimately increase the amount of people in prisons. Some of the new legislation has already been introduced to Parliament, and the laws may come into force as early as February 2011.
Legislation before Parliament - Sentencing Further Amendment Bill 2010
The new Government has already introduced legislation to abolish suspended sentences for what are termed “significant crimes.” This is the first step in a tough-on-crime approach. The measures go further than the legislation enacted by the previous government in 2010, which abolished the use of suspended sentences for “serious crimes” such as rape, murder and manslaughter. The new law will apply to crimes including recklessly causing serious injury and drug trafficking. Suspended sentences have been an important and flexible sentencing option for Judges and Magistrates in Victoria, which allow them to respond to the circumstances in which an offence is committed and the situation of the individual convicted. Abolishing the use of suspended sentences will result in more people being imprisoned in Victoria, but is likely to have very little impact on deterring people from committing crimes. For this reason the Federation of Community Legal Centres has stated that “Abolishing suspended sentences is likely to lead to a costly and unsustainable increase in the prison population without tackling the causes of crime”.[1]
Another change introduced by the new legislation is to increase the number of people on the Sentencing Advisory Council, and also to require that the Council have representation from a Victim’s Group and from Victoria Police. These changes appear designed to ensure that the Sentencing Advisory Council takes a “tough-on-crime” approach to sentencing issues, rather than acting as an independent community voice on sentencing, which was what the Council was created to do. The Council must represent a range of community views on sentencing, not just those that favour harsher penalties.
Minimum Standards for Serious Crimes
The new Government has also stated it will be introducing legislation to set minimum penalties for serious crimes. The minimum can apparently be lessened if there are extenuating or aggravated circumstances, but the overall aim is for the minimum standards to increase the amount of time inside for those convicted of a crime. The Coalition has stated that these changes are intended to “protect the community and deter would-be offenders”.[2] The new sentencing standards will apparently be developed in conjunction with the (newer, harsher) Sentencing Advisory Council, and the Court of Appeal will review sentences with the new minimum standards. The minimum standards will also aim to increase the non-parole period for ‘street violence’ and for people convicted of not providing known details of child abuse.
Changes to Community Based Orders and Home Detention
The new Government has promised to “toughen” and streamline the four existing community orders into a single Community Correction Order (CCO). The aim as stated by the government is for “tougher, common-sense sentences targeted directly at both the offender and the offence”.[3] This is another change that will mean Judges and Magistrates will have fewer options as to how to deal with the people who come before the Courts, and limit their ability to address complex factors which may cause offending such as drug addiction, mental health issues, poverty and homelessness. There is also talk that people under Orders will be put to ‘real work’ and an implicit push for people to generally receive more community-ordered work hours. The Coalition has also advised plans for abolishing home detention. The overall aim of this measure is accordingly also to increase sentence time. Tellingly, Baillieu recognised that the (approximately) 4 500 people currently incarcerated will increase.
Tougher sentences mean more people in prison for longer
The Coalition has acknowledged that it anticipates a “likely increase” in the number of people who are imprisoned due to its “tough-on–crime” policies including “extra police, more transit police, tougher sentencing, a zero tolerance to violence and drunken behaviour and anti-social behaviour – and … the abolition of home detention and suspended sentences.”[4] However, the Coalition has also asserted that it expected any increase in prison numbers to be in the short term, as once people are locked away for longer, crime will be reduced and these new penalties will be a stronger deterrent to committing crime. When asked on 3AW what evidence there is to support the claim that longer sentences reduce crime, Baillieu advised that increased sentences will get people "off the street". Baillieu could not provide specific research supporting his idea that increased sentences will reduce crime. He went on to say his logic is that while people are in prison, crime will not be committed. "Those offenders are not back on the streets."[5]
More people in prison does not mean safer communities
Prisons don’t stop people committing crime. In fact, prisons often fail to rehabilitate people and may even increase offending. A 2010 study by they NSWBureau of Crime Statistics found that offenders who were sentenced to prison were more likely to re-offend than those convicted of the same offence who received noncustodial penalties. [6] 56% of people in prison in Australia have been in prison before.[7] While putting someone in prison may stop them from offending for the period of their imprisonment, as a crime control mechanism, prison is blunt, harmful and extremely expensive.[8] The failure of prisons to rehabilitate prisoners is not surprising given that they are poorly equipped to address the underlying causes of crime and can exacerbate problems such as mental illness. Access to drug and alcohol counselling and programs, other offending programs, psychological counselling, education programs, skills programs and other rehabilitative strategies is severely limited in prison. Community resources would be better used on harm-prevention measures such as health care, education, housing, and employment. Council of Australian Government figures show that the average expenditure per prisoner per day in 2008-09 was $242.65, or close to $90,000 per year.[9] Policing and prisons respond to crimes after they occur, and often target the most disadvantaged members of our community. A more effective use of government spending would be to tackle issues such as poverty, unemployment, mental illness, education and health issues such as drug and alcohol use, which in turn would mean decreased crime and create safer communities.
The Abolition Collective is committed to creating safer communities without prisons or policing. For more information visit: http://www.abolitioncollective.org
[1]Smart Justice, “Abolishing suspended sentences may increase crime”, 22 December 2010, available from: http://www.communitylaw.org.au/cb_pages/media_releases.php.
[2]Coalition Press release, Coalition to set minimum sentence standards for serious crimes, 23 November 2010.
[3]Coalition Press release, Coalition to give teeth to community-based sentences, 23 November 2010.
[4]AAP, 500 more beds for male prisoners, 24 November 2010.
[5]AAP, Attorney-General opposes minimum sentences, November 23 2010.
[6] NSWBureau of Crime Statistics, The effect of prison on adult re-offending, August 2010.
[7] Australian Bureau of Statistics, Prisoners in Australia 2009 4517.0 (2009) p 11.
[8] Smart Justice ‘More prisons are not the answer to reducing crime’; accessed 23 November 2010.
[9] Smart Justice ‘More prisons are not the answer to reducing crime’; accessed 23 November 2010.