Opinion: Why kids in watch houses is a necessary evil

If watch houses are the only way to protect the public from youth criminals, then so be it, writes Robert Schwarten.

When I suggested a bipartisan parliamentary committee investigation into youth crime, Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk said there was value, but baulked at the idea because she believed opportunistic Opposition Leader David Crisafulli would merely play political games.

She’s been proved right.

Last week at Parliament House we saw a protest from victims of youth crime demanding action to remove child criminals from the streets.

When the government responded, the Opposition demanded it be slowed down as Katter’s Australian Party whinged about lack of consultation and the Greens were their usual grandstanding selves.

You could have cut the hypocrisy with a crosscut saw.

While the lawyers and Human Rights Commissioner have a responsibility to remind us that certain measures offend international agreements on human rights, it is the government’s responsibility to protect the human rights of the general public – and tough problems need tough responses.

We cannot be held ransom to young offenders who for whatever reason think they have the right to do what they like to whoever they like.

These people must be separated from the main herd.

It would be a stone heart that has no sympathy for most of these offenders. They have had the death card dealt at birth.

But in reality none of our current child protection, schooling programs, corrective programs or other diversions are working.

Bail is treated as a joke, so the courts have no bearing on these kids’ attitude.

No one with any conscience likes this, but Deputy Premier Steven Miles nailed it when he said the public is demanding this type of action.

The government is building facilities, but if watch houses are the only way to separate the public from ongoing attack, then so be it.

The government is also starting intervention programs to try to stop the problem worsening at birth.

But that is a long-term solution. It does nothing for the here and now.

As one of the MPs who worked with Judy Spence to deliver the new committee system it was never the case that all legislation had to go through it; that was left to the House to decide – that is, whoever had the numbers.

In this case the government used its numbers in response to the loudest plea to ever come from the forecourt at Parliament House, and if I was still there I would have done exactly the same thing.

Robert Schwarten was a Beattie Labor government minister