Markets 
A controversial amendment to the Queensland Youth Justice Act could see youth offenders sent away to remote areas for up to six months.
The “circuit breaker” sentencing bill has been sold as a new intervention aimed at reducing youth offending and improving community safety.
The state’s Justice, Integrity and Community Safety Committee recommended on Friday that the Youth Justice Act 1992 be amended to introduce a highly structured, residential rehabilitation option for young offenders, positioned as an alternative to detention.
The courts could send youth offenders away for three to six months in a remote location with a service provider. An order may only be made if the chief executive has provided the court with a suitability report containing an assessment of the youth’s suitability for the order.
Youth involved in the program would be under continuous supervision and must comply with strict routines and behavioural expectations, the committee said.
“The program is positioned as an intervention that disrupts patterns of offending by removing young people from negative influences and providing a controlled, rehabilitative environment focused on accountability and long-term outcomes,” it said.
If a participant breaches the conditions of the program, they may have their time there extended, or be resentenced with the possibility of detention.
Documents tabled alongside the bill say some may only be open to boys – and will likely hit First Nations kids harder than others.
The bill has been compared by a number of major stakeholder submissions to the contentious Newman-era “bootcamps”.
Several submissions to the committee argued that the proposed Circuit Breaker program lacked a sufficiently developed evidence base and that the explanatory materials did not adequately demonstrate how the model would achieve better outcomes than previous residential interventions such as the bootcamps.
Others raised concerns about the compatibility of the bill with children’s rights. YFS Legal, PeakCare and the Queensland Family and Child Commission (QFCC) submitted that, while described as an alternative to detention, the proposed model would involve significant restrictions on children’s liberty and movement and should be accompanied by stronger legislative safeguards, oversight mechanisms and protections for children’s rights and wellbeing.
Queensland Labor’s statement of opposition to the bill labelled the program a “band aid for a system under pressure” that would artificially inflate detention capacity.
Labor said the security measures at sites may only be a fence with lockable gates, and are not comparable to detention.
It compared the program to Newman-era “bootcamps”, noting they were evaluated and scrapped for ineffectiveness at reducing recidivism.
Greens MP Michael Berkman also submitted a statement of opposition to the bill, claiming there was a complete lack of evidence that it will meet its objectives, and the limitations on human rights are not justifiable.
“There are existing programs and services in Queensland and other jurisdictions that have been shown to reduce offending without separating young people from their communities or imposing severe surveillance and movement constraints,” Berkman said.
“There is no justification for subjecting Queensland children to an essentially experimental program, other than political sloganeering.”
Both Labor and the Greens opposed an exemption for reporting entities, who would not be required to report a matter if doing so would incriminate them.
If the bill was passed, which he opposed, Berkman recommended this exemption be removed.
He also argued programs must include independent multidisciplinary screening for cognitive impairment and neurological capacity, with adjustments available based on young people’s assessed needs.
Berkman also recommended a transparent and independent process for evaluation and reporting on the program – including impacts on family and cultural connection, harm and use of force, housing stability and reoffending – and that for-profit providers be excluded from the program.
The program is slated to be up and running next month, after the bill passes parliament in its late August sitting.
The committee considered 57 written submissions from stakeholders, written submissions from officials, and two public briefings.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
From our partners
Read the full article here
