❓ A WA parliamentary question seeks information on plans to expand the Intellectual Disability Diversion Program (IDDP) to include broader cognitive impairments, outer-metropolitan courts, and other adult court jurisdictions. The response indicates limited expansion plans and defers some questions to the Department of the Attorney General.
AnsweredQoN 6054Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to recommendations 22, 24 and 25 of the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia Final Report 'Court Intervention Programs: Project No. 96' that recommended that the Intellectual Disability Diversion Program (IDDP) be expanded in several ways, and I ask —
(1) Does the Attorney General have plans to expand the IDDP in accordance with these recommendations to ensure that —
(a) the IDDP is able to include offenders with all types of cognitive impairment including acquired or organic brain injury, intellectual disability, dementia and other degenerative brain disorders;
(b) the IDDP is able to service the outer-metropolitan courts;
(c) the IDDP is formally available to offenders in all adult court jurisdictions;
(d) there is no formal requirement that an offender plead guilty to an offence to be accepted onto the IDDP;
(e) an offender is not barred from participating in the IDDP for a particular offence on the basis that he or she has pleaded not guilty to, or disputes the facts of, another offence, whether related or unrelated;
(f) applicants that are assessed as ineligible for the IDDP are returned to the general court list to be dealt with at the earliest opportunity;
(g) applicants that are returned to the general court list, who withdraw or are terminated from the IDDP before completion and have indicated no contest to the objective facts of the offence retain the option to plead the defence of insanity under section 27 of the
Criminal Code (WA)
;
(h) participation in the program is voluntary and written consent to sharing information between government departments and external service providers is obtained;
(i) anything done by the offender in compliance with the program is taken into account and all sentencing options are available to the magistrate;
(j) the IDDP operates with a designated magistrate who —
(i) has received relevant training;
(ii) has an understanding of issues facing mentally impaired offenders;
(iii) interest in improving outcomes for mentally impaired offenders;
(k) other magistrates are trained as relief magistrates or to service the IDDP in outer-metropolitan areas;
(l) the IDDP is sufficiently resourced to allow it to purchase relevant non-government service providers on behalf of participants; and
(m) staff of regional courts and those responsible for coordinating and running the Children's Court are trained by and, where necessary, take advice from coordinators of the IDDP program?
(2) Does the Attorney General have plans to alter or expand the IDDP in any other way?
(3) If yes to (1) or (2), how and when will the IDDP be expanded? Please table copies of any relevant documents.
(4) If no to (1) or (2), why not?
(1) Does the Attorney General have plans to expand the IDDP in accordance with these recommendations to ensure that —
(a) the IDDP is able to include offenders with all types of cognitive impairment including acquired or organic brain injury, intellectual disability, dementia and other degenerative brain disorders;
(b) the IDDP is able to service the outer-metropolitan courts;
(c) the IDDP is formally available to offenders in all adult court jurisdictions;
(d) there is no formal requirement that an offender plead guilty to an offence to be accepted onto the IDDP;
(e) an offender is not barred from participating in the IDDP for a particular offence on the basis that he or she has pleaded not guilty to, or disputes the facts of, another offence, whether related or unrelated;
(f) applicants that are assessed as ineligible for the IDDP are returned to the general court list to be dealt with at the earliest opportunity;
(g) applicants that are returned to the general court list, who withdraw or are terminated from the IDDP before completion and have indicated no contest to the objective facts of the offence retain the option to plead the defence of insanity under section 27 of the
Criminal Code (WA)
;
(h) participation in the program is voluntary and written consent to sharing information between government departments and external service providers is obtained;
(i) anything done by the offender in compliance with the program is taken into account and all sentencing options are available to the magistrate;
(j) the IDDP operates with a designated magistrate who —
(i) has received relevant training;
(ii) has an understanding of issues facing mentally impaired offenders;
(iii) interest in improving outcomes for mentally impaired offenders;
(k) other magistrates are trained as relief magistrates or to service the IDDP in outer-metropolitan areas;
(l) the IDDP is sufficiently resourced to allow it to purchase relevant non-government service providers on behalf of participants; and
(m) staff of regional courts and those responsible for coordinating and running the Children's Court are trained by and, where necessary, take advice from coordinators of the IDDP program?
(2) Does the Attorney General have plans to alter or expand the IDDP in any other way?
(3) If yes to (1) or (2), how and when will the IDDP be expanded? Please table copies of any relevant documents.
(4) If no to (1) or (2), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
23 October 2012
Responded by
Minister for Corrective Services
Response time
34 days
(1)(a) The Department of Corrective Services (the Department) advises that adult offenders with cognitive impairments including acquired or organic brain injury, intellectually disability, dementia and other degenerative brain disorders can now be referred to the Intellectual Disability Diversion Program (IDDP).
(1)(b) No. The Department advises that referrals can be made from outer?metropolitan Courts.
(1)(c) No. The Department advises that the IDDP is only available to defendants in the Magistrates Court jurisdiction.
(1)(d) The Department advises that a defendant does not need to plead guilty but should intend to plead guilty.
(1)(e)-(1)(f) The Department advises that this is current practice.
(1)(g) The Department advises that defendants that are returned to the general court list have all the options available under provisions of the
Criminal Code.
(1)(h)-(1)(i) The Department advises that this is current practice.
(j)(i)-(iii) The Department is unable to comment on the training of the designated Magistrate. This needs to be referred to the Department of the Attorney General (DotAG) for a response.
(k) The Department is unable to comment on the training of the designated Magistrate. This needs to be referred to the DotAG for a response.
(l) The Department advises that there are sufficient resources to purchase relevant non?government service providers for participants.
(m) The Department advises that the IDDP co?ordinator does not train staff of Regional Courts and the Children's Court.
(2) The Department has no plans to alter or expand the IDDP.
(3) Not applicable.
(4) The Department advises that the current program is confined to the Central Law Courts and DotAG is the lead agency which would make decisions regarding expansion. The Department cannot comment on the Attorney General's plans to alter or expand the IDDP.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
(1)(b) No. The Department advises that referrals can be made from outer?metropolitan Courts.
(1)(c) No. The Department advises that the IDDP is only available to defendants in the Magistrates Court jurisdiction.
(1)(d) The Department advises that a defendant does not need to plead guilty but should intend to plead guilty.
(1)(e)-(1)(f) The Department advises that this is current practice.
(1)(g) The Department advises that defendants that are returned to the general court list have all the options available under provisions of the
Criminal Code.
(1)(h)-(1)(i) The Department advises that this is current practice.
(j)(i)-(iii) The Department is unable to comment on the training of the designated Magistrate. This needs to be referred to the Department of the Attorney General (DotAG) for a response.
(k) The Department is unable to comment on the training of the designated Magistrate. This needs to be referred to the DotAG for a response.
(l) The Department advises that there are sufficient resources to purchase relevant non?government service providers for participants.
(m) The Department advises that the IDDP co?ordinator does not train staff of Regional Courts and the Children's Court.
(2) The Department has no plans to alter or expand the IDDP.
(3) Not applicable.
(4) The Department advises that the current program is confined to the Central Law Courts and DotAG is the lead agency which would make decisions regarding expansion. The Department cannot comment on the Attorney General's plans to alter or expand the IDDP.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.