❓ Question addresses government actions and future plans for juvenile justice in WA. The Minister outlines structural reforms, improved diversion program performance, and the scrapping of the Family Intensive Program due to low engagement rates.
AnsweredQoN 486Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
JUVENILE JUSTICE
Helping young people to avoid falling into a life of crime is an important issue in my local community as well as in the state as a whole. I am proud to be part of a government that continues to focus on not only preventing crime but also proactively responding to it. Can the minister advise what the government has done in the area of juvenile justice and what its plans are for the future? Mr C.C. PORTER
Helping young people to avoid falling into a life of crime is an important issue in my local community as well as in the state as a whole. I am proud to be part of a government that continues to focus on not only preventing crime but also proactively responding to it. Can the minister advise what the government has done in the area of juvenile justice and what its plans are for the future? Mr C.C. PORTER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question. Indeed, as part of my answer, I will explain a structural reform that I am about to embark on at the Department of Corrective Services that may not be without some contentious aspects. I will openly explain those changes as best as I can to the opposition and the house. We have undertaken major structural reform in youth justice. We have separated adult and youth justice across my department, we have appointed an assistant commissioner and we have started new metropolitan youth justice centres. The Auditor General found under the previous government that the use of redirection options for juveniles was declining and that more juveniles were being detained on remand. In essence, this was occurring because the juvenile justice teams were not meeting the people who were diverted within the benchmark six-week period. Of course, if they were not meeting the juveniles within that period, the juveniles were going out and reoffending. People lost confidence in the system. At the time of the Auditor General’s report, the percentage meeting that benchmark was 32 per cent, which was why the system was failing. There has been significant improvement under the structural reform that has been undertaken so far by our government. We set ourselves a target in 2009–10 of seeing 65 per cent of those juveniles within that six-week period. That target has been exceeded, with 72 per cent of juveniles seen within that time in 2009–10. That is a very significant improvement. That has meant that the number of juvenile justice team referrals has also radically increased. In 2007–08 there were 3 168 referrals to juvenile justice teams and in 2009–10 there were 3 856 referrals, which is a 21 per cent increase. We can spend a lot of time considering the question of who cares most about juvenile justice and juvenile diversion, but the performance of this government has been very good in comparison with the performance of the previous government. One interesting point the member for Girrawheen will recall is that of inactive files. Inactive files for juveniles, which is a bit of an Orwellian term, are files relating to juveniles who have been referred or diverted for which no single full-time equivalent at the Department of Corrective Services is in charge. In January 2008, when we inherited this office, 53.5 per cent of all juvenile justice referrals were inactive. No-one was in charge of them. The number of inactive files in June 2010 was zero. That is a major improvement. The member for Girrawheen will remember the intensive supervision program, which was later named the family intensive program. About $3 million was spent on that program each year. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr C.C. PORTER replied: I thank the member for the question. Indeed, as part of my answer, I will explain a structural reform that I am about to embark on at the Department of Corrective Services that may not be without some contentious aspects. I will openly explain those changes as best as I can to the opposition and the house. We have undertaken major structural reform in youth justice. We have separated adult and youth justice across my department, we have appointed an assistant commissioner and we have started new metropolitan youth justice centres. The Auditor General found under the previous government that the use of redirection options for juveniles was declining and that more juveniles were being detained on remand. In essence, this was occurring because the juvenile justice teams were not meeting the people who were diverted within the benchmark six-week period. Of course, if they were not meeting the juveniles within that period, the juveniles were going out and reoffending. People lost confidence in the system. At the time of the Auditor General’s report, the percentage meeting that benchmark was 32 per cent, which was why the system was failing. There has been significant improvement under the structural reform that has been undertaken so far by our government. We set ourselves a target in 2009–10 of seeing 65 per cent of those juveniles within that six-week period. That target has been exceeded, with 72 per cent of juveniles seen within that time in 2009–10. That is a very significant improvement. That has meant that the number of juvenile justice team referrals has also radically increased. In 2007–08 there were 3 168 referrals to juvenile justice teams and in 2009–10 there were 3 856 referrals, which is a 21 per cent increase. We can spend a lot of time considering the question of who cares most about juvenile justice and juvenile diversion, but the performance of this government has been very good in comparison with the performance of the previous government. One interesting point the member for Girrawheen will recall is that of inactive files. Inactive files for juveniles, which is a bit of an Orwellian term, are files relating to juveniles who have been referred or diverted for which no single full-time equivalent at the Department of Corrective Services is in charge. In January 2008, when we inherited this office, 53.5 per cent of all juvenile justice referrals were inactive. No-one was in charge of them. The number of inactive files in June 2010 was zero. That is a major improvement. The member for Girrawheen will remember the intensive supervision program, which was later named the family intensive program. About $3 million was spent on that program each year. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
I thank the member for the question. Indeed, as part of my answer, I will explain a structural reform that I am about to embark on at the Department of Corrective Services that may not be without some contentious aspects. I will openly explain those changes as best as I can to the opposition and the house. We have undertaken major structural reform in youth justice. We have separated adult and youth justice across my department, we have appointed an assistant commissioner and we have started new metropolitan youth justice centres. The Auditor General found under the previous government that the use of redirection options for juveniles was declining and that more juveniles were being detained on remand. In essence, this was occurring because the juvenile justice teams were not meeting the people who were diverted within the benchmark six-week period. Of course, if they were not meeting the juveniles within that period, the juveniles were going out and reoffending. People lost confidence in the system. At the time of the Auditor General’s report, the percentage meeting that benchmark was 32 per cent, which was why the system was failing. There has been significant improvement under the structural reform that has been undertaken so far by our government. We set ourselves a target in 2009–10 of seeing 65 per cent of those juveniles within that six-week period. That target has been exceeded, with 72 per cent of juveniles seen within that time in 2009–10. That is a very significant improvement. That has meant that the number of juvenile justice team referrals has also radically increased. In 2007–08 there were 3 168 referrals to juvenile justice teams and in 2009–10 there were 3 856 referrals, which is a 21 per cent increase. We can spend a lot of time considering the question of who cares most about juvenile justice and juvenile diversion, but the performance of this government has been very good in comparison with the performance of the previous government. One interesting point the member for Girrawheen will recall is that of inactive files. Inactive files for juveniles, which is a bit of an Orwellian term, are files relating to juveniles who have been referred or diverted for which no single full-time equivalent at the Department of Corrective Services is in charge. In January 2008, when we inherited this office, 53.5 per cent of all juvenile justice referrals were inactive. No-one was in charge of them. The number of inactive files in June 2010 was zero. That is a major improvement. The member for Girrawheen will remember the intensive supervision program, which was later named the family intensive program. About $3 million was spent on that program each year. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
One interesting point the member for Girrawheen will recall is that of inactive files. Inactive files for juveniles, which is a bit of an Orwellian term, are files relating to juveniles who have been referred or diverted for which no single full-time equivalent at the Department of Corrective Services is in charge. In January 2008, when we inherited this office, 53.5 per cent of all juvenile justice referrals were inactive. No-one was in charge of them. The number of inactive files in June 2010 was zero. That is a major improvement. The member for Girrawheen will remember the intensive supervision program, which was later named the family intensive program. About $3 million was spent on that program each year. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr C.C. PORTER replied: I thank the member for the question. Indeed, as part of my answer, I will explain a structural reform that I am about to embark on at the Department of Corrective Services that may not be without some contentious aspects. I will openly explain those changes as best as I can to the opposition and the house. We have undertaken major structural reform in youth justice. We have separated adult and youth justice across my department, we have appointed an assistant commissioner and we have started new metropolitan youth justice centres. The Auditor General found under the previous government that the use of redirection options for juveniles was declining and that more juveniles were being detained on remand. In essence, this was occurring because the juvenile justice teams were not meeting the people who were diverted within the benchmark six-week period. Of course, if they were not meeting the juveniles within that period, the juveniles were going out and reoffending. People lost confidence in the system. At the time of the Auditor General’s report, the percentage meeting that benchmark was 32 per cent, which was why the system was failing. There has been significant improvement under the structural reform that has been undertaken so far by our government. We set ourselves a target in 2009–10 of seeing 65 per cent of those juveniles within that six-week period. That target has been exceeded, with 72 per cent of juveniles seen within that time in 2009–10. That is a very significant improvement. That has meant that the number of juvenile justice team referrals has also radically increased. In 2007–08 there were 3 168 referrals to juvenile justice teams and in 2009–10 there were 3 856 referrals, which is a 21 per cent increase. We can spend a lot of time considering the question of who cares most about juvenile justice and juvenile diversion, but the performance of this government has been very good in comparison with the performance of the previous government. One interesting point the member for Girrawheen will recall is that of inactive files. Inactive files for juveniles, which is a bit of an Orwellian term, are files relating to juveniles who have been referred or diverted for which no single full-time equivalent at the Department of Corrective Services is in charge. In January 2008, when we inherited this office, 53.5 per cent of all juvenile justice referrals were inactive. No-one was in charge of them. The number of inactive files in June 2010 was zero. That is a major improvement. The member for Girrawheen will remember the intensive supervision program, which was later named the family intensive program. About $3 million was spent on that program each year. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
I thank the member for the question. Indeed, as part of my answer, I will explain a structural reform that I am about to embark on at the Department of Corrective Services that may not be without some contentious aspects. I will openly explain those changes as best as I can to the opposition and the house. We have undertaken major structural reform in youth justice. We have separated adult and youth justice across my department, we have appointed an assistant commissioner and we have started new metropolitan youth justice centres. The Auditor General found under the previous government that the use of redirection options for juveniles was declining and that more juveniles were being detained on remand. In essence, this was occurring because the juvenile justice teams were not meeting the people who were diverted within the benchmark six-week period. Of course, if they were not meeting the juveniles within that period, the juveniles were going out and reoffending. People lost confidence in the system. At the time of the Auditor General’s report, the percentage meeting that benchmark was 32 per cent, which was why the system was failing. There has been significant improvement under the structural reform that has been undertaken so far by our government. We set ourselves a target in 2009–10 of seeing 65 per cent of those juveniles within that six-week period. That target has been exceeded, with 72 per cent of juveniles seen within that time in 2009–10. That is a very significant improvement. That has meant that the number of juvenile justice team referrals has also radically increased. In 2007–08 there were 3 168 referrals to juvenile justice teams and in 2009–10 there were 3 856 referrals, which is a 21 per cent increase. We can spend a lot of time considering the question of who cares most about juvenile justice and juvenile diversion, but the performance of this government has been very good in comparison with the performance of the previous government. One interesting point the member for Girrawheen will recall is that of inactive files. Inactive files for juveniles, which is a bit of an Orwellian term, are files relating to juveniles who have been referred or diverted for which no single full-time equivalent at the Department of Corrective Services is in charge. In January 2008, when we inherited this office, 53.5 per cent of all juvenile justice referrals were inactive. No-one was in charge of them. The number of inactive files in June 2010 was zero. That is a major improvement. The member for Girrawheen will remember the intensive supervision program, which was later named the family intensive program. About $3 million was spent on that program each year. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
One interesting point the member for Girrawheen will recall is that of inactive files. Inactive files for juveniles, which is a bit of an Orwellian term, are files relating to juveniles who have been referred or diverted for which no single full-time equivalent at the Department of Corrective Services is in charge. In January 2008, when we inherited this office, 53.5 per cent of all juvenile justice referrals were inactive. No-one was in charge of them. The number of inactive files in June 2010 was zero. That is a major improvement. The member for Girrawheen will remember the intensive supervision program, which was later named the family intensive program. About $3 million was spent on that program each year. Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Ms M.M. Quirk interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr C.C. PORTER : Unfortunately, it has not been very successful. I have determined that we will scrap that program and divert the money to other working programs, such as the one I just mentioned inside the Department of Corrective Services. At my request, an independent review and audit of the family intensive program was undertaken in 2009. The idea of the program was that the worst juvenile offenders, who came from the most dysfunctional families, would be seen on an intensive basis. That is a good policy. It was admirably undertaken. However, it was very difficult to achieve and unfortunately it has not worked. Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr P. Papalia : You under-resourced it. Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr C.C. PORTER : It was not that it was under-resourced. I will explain why it did not work. There were 357 referrals to that program between 2004 and 2009. Only 65 per cent of those referrals ever got to the point at which the family wanted to engage with the system. Only 58 per cent of those referrals were ever completed. The program was not under-resourced, but because families could not be forced, encouraged or cajoled into engaging with it, there was a situation — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
Mr C.C. PORTER : I am very happy to brief the member on all the reasons for making that decision. He can disagree with it. In 2007–08 around $3.2 million was spent on this program and only 29 people completed it. That meant that it cost in excess of $110 000 for each juvenile who completed the program. In effect, we had two FTEs devoted to each person who finished the program. It may have done some good for the individuals involved, but when we considered the opportunity cost of that money being diverted into other things that we know are working and are measurable, I decided to take the decision to reallocate this money. We are going to reallocate the money, member for Warnbro, to a range of programs to make sure that the money will stay in those areas of Kalgoorlie and Geraldton where the FIT program existed, and that the money will stay in those areas of the metropolitan region to which it was allocated. We are determining to have increased full-year funding for the bail service, which will specifically focus on engaging with Aboriginal families and communities to identify responsible adults to supervise young people on bail, provide interim bail and provide short-term bail accommodation. That will be $878 000 a year. We will give $200 000 to a non-government diversion service for Aboriginal youth. We will also give $322 000 in increased funding to the Killara Youth and Family Support Service, and also reallocate money along similar lines in the Mid West and Kalgoorlie regions. This is a decision that we have made, and I am very happy to brief the member on it in full. However, what we found was that far from the program being under-resourced, it simply was not able to deliver the results in getting the engagement of the families it was trying to target. In the end the people who went through the system were the same types of people we are targeting through existing systems.
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.