Tough-on-crime ‘myth’ won’t stop youth offending, say experts

Governments need to listen to expert advice if they want to combat youth crime, instead of making fanciful promises and reactive legislative changes, experts say.

The Liberal National Party made underage offenders a focus of Queensland’s 2024 state election, with the coalition winning government on the back of its “adult crime, adult time” pledge.

The new laws mean youth offenders who commit murder will receive a mandatory life term, while sentences have been doubled for wounding, serious assault and robbery. Attempted murder will soon also come under adult sentencing.

David Crisafulli has prioritised changes to youth crime laws since winning power.Credit: Matt Dennien

But former Queensland Law Society president Rebecca Fogerty said the state government was once again being reactive instead of listening to expert advice.

“No legal expert supported these laws,” she said. “The whole response has been one that is deliberately, negligently and offensively anti-expert.”

Evidence showed addressing issues like poverty and intergenerational trauma rather than harsher penalties would lead to lower youth crime rates, she said.

“We have known this for decades, and successive governments have repeatedly failed to properly address the root causes,” Fogerty said.

“Crime and punishment discourse is an easy sell to the public, and it doesn’t cost as much money to implement.”

But Fogerty said mandatory sentences meant more trials and more expenses because there were no longer any incentives to plead guilty.

“There are going to be more costs associated with running the courts,” she said.

“Those flow-on costs will become exacerbated by the fact these laws will mean more people are in jail for longer.”

Seven Emu Station in the Northern Territory offers at-risk Aboriginal children hands-on training and cultural teachings aimed at breaking the cycle of youth crime.Credit: Justin McManus

Mandatory sentences also limit a defendant’s right to a fair trial and a sentence that “fits the crime”, Law Council of Australia president Juliana Warner said.

It takes away a judge’s ability to consider a defendant’s age, personal circumstances and cognitive ability for sentence.

“They interfere with judicial independence, which is an essential component of the rule of law,” Warner said.

“Such regimes are costly, and there is a lack of evidence as to their effectiveness as a deterrent, or their ability to reduce crime.”

Last week the WA government also announced plans to introduce fast-tracked trials for young people charged with violent crimes.

Under the proposal, accused children who commit further violent crimes while on bail will have to face trial within 28 days.

But Social Reinvestment WA acting chief executive Mason Rothwell said if governments were serious about reducing youth crime, they would invest more into support services to address the root causes.

“We actually need to dispel this narrative that tough on crime works – it’s a myth, and it always has been,” Rothwell said.

“Getting kids into a system like the courts only works if it’s actually rehabilitating them.”

Blake Cansdale, the national director of Change the Record, a First Nations-led coalition of legal, health and family violence prevention experts, agreed, saying incarceration had been “unequivocally proven to harm children’s social and cognitive development”.

A rehabilitative focus would benefit youth offenders, their families and the broader community, Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service chief Nerita Waight said.

“Governments need to invest in self-determined models of prevention, early intervention, diversion and community-based programs,” she said.

“Supporting and diverting more children away from the criminal legal system is the only solution that will work.”

AAP