The Sunday Telegraph | November 25 2012
ATTORNEY General Greg Smith will stick to his plans to reform bail laws despite police opposition, saying only those likely to abscond, re-offend or hurt someone will be put in jail and the rest will walk free.
Mr Smith believes bail laws are too complex and so tough they "almost made bail an alternative form of imprisonment". Critics fear changes will give criminals a "get out of jail free" card.
In June, the Law Reform Commission suggested presumptions for or against bail depending on offence should be scrapped and the accused should be released unless they are a risk of absconding, reoffending or harming someone.
It was concerned that too many people, particularly young and indigenous, are in jail even though they have not been convicted of a crime.
Mr Smith told The Sunday Telegraph that the government's response to the review, expected this week, would be "sympathetic" to the report.
"That will be the test. If the court is satisfied that any of those things might happen, they will be bail refused. Otherwise they will be bail granted.
"The act and the ultimate act will draw much from the learning that went into the review. It won't strictly stick to many of the recommendations but it will be sympathetic to some of the principles espoused in the review."
He said there would be announcements on specific presumptions, but would not be drawn further.
Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione is opposed to the changes, saying the current laws work well, as is the Police Association, which warns that watering down bail conditions would endanger the community.
Premier Barry O'Farrell has pledged cabinet would not weaken bail laws.
Smith denied suggestion colleagues have been hostile about the changes, saying they have given him "magnificent" support. "The report will be a reasoned report and it will be a unanimous view of the cabinet and the government."
But the Police Association warns that change to the bail laws would give criminals a get out of jail free card.
"Tough bail laws are pivotal to a safe community and we are hopeful that the government will not move towards weakening these protections which are designed to keep criminals behind bars, he said.
"The recommendations made by the Law Reform Commission would put the community at risk if they were implemented."
"Bail laws should help make our society safer. Any watering down of community protections by allowing persons accused of serious and violent crimes to be released on bail would be out of touch with community expectations."
The Law Society NSW supports reforms to the bail laws. "We were very pleased with the report," said President Justin Dowd.
Showing posts with label Greg Smith. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Greg Smith. Show all posts
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Monday, August 20, 2012
730 New South Wales investigates changes to the Right to Silence
ABC 730 | 19 August 2012
See Quentin Dempster's piece "O'Farrell Government overhauls 'right to silence'" here, including O'Farrell's announcement, and interviews with Phillip Boulten SC and Evan Whitton.
And then see Dempster's interview with Attorney-General Greg Smith here.
Smith says the modification will not apply to certain categories of accused, or to people who have not had access to legal advice. He says duty lawyers will not be provided to Police stations, but does hint at a phone advice service being made available.
See Quentin Dempster's piece "O'Farrell Government overhauls 'right to silence'" here, including O'Farrell's announcement, and interviews with Phillip Boulten SC and Evan Whitton.
And then see Dempster's interview with Attorney-General Greg Smith here.
Smith says the modification will not apply to certain categories of accused, or to people who have not had access to legal advice. He says duty lawyers will not be provided to Police stations, but does hint at a phone advice service being made available.
Friday, August 17, 2012
NSW Bikie Laws Will Catch Innocents
Kirk McKenzie | New Matilda | 15 August 2012
Barry O'Farrell's consorting laws have already caught one young disabled man, but their scope is wide enough to nab anybody. Repeal these unjust laws, writes Kirk McKenzie
The recent jailing for consorting of Charlie Foster, a young intellectually disabled man, highlights the rank injustice of the O’Farrell government’s new consorting laws. A NSW District Court Judge yesterday set aside Foster’s conviction after finding the elements of the offence not proved, but the matter is not over — the police are still to pursue the matter.
These new laws (sections 93X and 93Y of the State’s Crimes Act) reinstate notoriously bad laws which applied from the late 1920s until 1979 when they were deliberately watered down by the Wran Labor government. They have rarely been used since.
According to Greg Smith, Barry O’Farrell’s Attorney General, the new laws are aimed at bikies. However, the legislation is not so restricted and will inevitably catch many entirely innocent people.
So what precisely is wrong with these laws? They penalise people just for associating with people previously convicted of "indictable offences" — a category not restricted to serious offences.
The legislation says that if you communicate, say by sending a text message, to two convicted offenders on two occasions, you may receive an oral warning from a police officer. If after the warning, you send a further text message to one of the two offenders, you may be charged with "habitual consorting", punishable by up to 3 years imprisonment!
This offence involves at least three clear breaches of Australia’s human rights obligations under the main international human rights treaty, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR"). Australia ratified this treaty in 1980 (under a Liberal National government) with the result that all Australian parliaments have since had an obligation to adhere to its terms, including Article 22 which requires the principle of freedom of association to be respected.
The new offence is amazingly wide. "Indictable offences" are those serious enough to go before a judge and jury. However, most indictable offences are dealt with in the Magistrates Courts and many such offences are quite minor. For example, Common Assault, Shoplifting and Obstructing a Police Officer are indictable offences in NSW (and elsewhere).
A further problem is that there is no automatic defence to the new charge. Even a spouse, parent or a child of a previous offender can be charged. There is (in section 93X) a qualified defence for family members, doctors, teachers, employers and lawyers but significantly, any person in those categories can still be arrested, charged and brought before a Court and then has the onus of proving that their association with the person concerned was "reasonable in the circumstances". This ridiculous provision reverses the onus of proof — even entirely innocent spouses, parents or children are caught. A lawyer could be charged and have to go to Court to prove the reasonableness of acting for the person concerned.
Lawyers who regularly act for convicted persons, may be warned to cease acting for a client, if, for example 40 years ago that client was convicted of shoplifting. If the lawyer ignores the warning, a charge may follow. This amounts to an unjustified interference with the workings of independent courts and, for that reason, the offence is arguably unconstitutional. It also breaches Article 14(3) of the ICCPR by limiting defendants’ rights to communicate with, and to be assisted by, lawyers of their own choosing.
The reversal of the onus of proof imposed on families, doctors and lawyers involves a third breach of international law, namely the abrogation of the presumption of innocence in Article 14(2) of the ICCPR, also a fundamental principle of Australian criminal law. Under this principle, the prosecution is required to prove all elements of a criminal offence beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not the accused’s role to have to prove their innocence, yet that is precisely what a spouse, teacher or doctor (or mother!) may have to do, to avoid conviction. The right to silence also goes out the window.
A bizarre consequence of section 93X is that priests, ministers of religion and other clergy are completely unprotected. They have no defence at all, not even the right to come to Court to prove their association reasonable. Many others such as social workers, trade union members and officials and even fellow members of sporting or social clubs, fall into the same category.
A further important objection is the arbitrary power these laws deliver into the hands of police officers. Bikies have already been charged under these new provisions and say they will appeal any convictions to the High Court. They may end up being seen as heroes as a result. However, it may be the people of Moree, Walgett and other NSW regions where Indigenous Australians live and work, who may be the most vulnerable. Some of these regions have higher crime rates and Aboriginal people are therefore much more susceptible to arbitrary police action than elsewhere.
There is a wider problem with this sort of law making. Unfortunately, because of the mainstream media’s obsession with federal politics, a lot of legislation is quickly waved through state parliaments without sufficient scrutiny. The Bill introducing these changes went through with only minor media comment and little public debate.
In NSW, with no Charter of Rights, many politicians neither know nor understand what rights they should be protecting. The NSW Parliament should replicate the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities which is based on the ICCPR. That treaty contains the universal, minimalist position of the world democratic community on civil rights and has been ratified by 167 countries. The Victorian Charter is now supported by the Baillieu Coalition government and there is little logic in Barry O’Farrell’s continued opposition to such a reform.
One thing is certain — until this dopey, repressive, unjust, outrageous piece of legislation is repealed, more Charlie Fosters will be lined up for punishment.
Barry O'Farrell's consorting laws have already caught one young disabled man, but their scope is wide enough to nab anybody. Repeal these unjust laws, writes Kirk McKenzie
The recent jailing for consorting of Charlie Foster, a young intellectually disabled man, highlights the rank injustice of the O’Farrell government’s new consorting laws. A NSW District Court Judge yesterday set aside Foster’s conviction after finding the elements of the offence not proved, but the matter is not over — the police are still to pursue the matter.
These new laws (sections 93X and 93Y of the State’s Crimes Act) reinstate notoriously bad laws which applied from the late 1920s until 1979 when they were deliberately watered down by the Wran Labor government. They have rarely been used since.
According to Greg Smith, Barry O’Farrell’s Attorney General, the new laws are aimed at bikies. However, the legislation is not so restricted and will inevitably catch many entirely innocent people.
So what precisely is wrong with these laws? They penalise people just for associating with people previously convicted of "indictable offences" — a category not restricted to serious offences.
The legislation says that if you communicate, say by sending a text message, to two convicted offenders on two occasions, you may receive an oral warning from a police officer. If after the warning, you send a further text message to one of the two offenders, you may be charged with "habitual consorting", punishable by up to 3 years imprisonment!
This offence involves at least three clear breaches of Australia’s human rights obligations under the main international human rights treaty, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR"). Australia ratified this treaty in 1980 (under a Liberal National government) with the result that all Australian parliaments have since had an obligation to adhere to its terms, including Article 22 which requires the principle of freedom of association to be respected.
The new offence is amazingly wide. "Indictable offences" are those serious enough to go before a judge and jury. However, most indictable offences are dealt with in the Magistrates Courts and many such offences are quite minor. For example, Common Assault, Shoplifting and Obstructing a Police Officer are indictable offences in NSW (and elsewhere).
A further problem is that there is no automatic defence to the new charge. Even a spouse, parent or a child of a previous offender can be charged. There is (in section 93X) a qualified defence for family members, doctors, teachers, employers and lawyers but significantly, any person in those categories can still be arrested, charged and brought before a Court and then has the onus of proving that their association with the person concerned was "reasonable in the circumstances". This ridiculous provision reverses the onus of proof — even entirely innocent spouses, parents or children are caught. A lawyer could be charged and have to go to Court to prove the reasonableness of acting for the person concerned.
Lawyers who regularly act for convicted persons, may be warned to cease acting for a client, if, for example 40 years ago that client was convicted of shoplifting. If the lawyer ignores the warning, a charge may follow. This amounts to an unjustified interference with the workings of independent courts and, for that reason, the offence is arguably unconstitutional. It also breaches Article 14(3) of the ICCPR by limiting defendants’ rights to communicate with, and to be assisted by, lawyers of their own choosing.
The reversal of the onus of proof imposed on families, doctors and lawyers involves a third breach of international law, namely the abrogation of the presumption of innocence in Article 14(2) of the ICCPR, also a fundamental principle of Australian criminal law. Under this principle, the prosecution is required to prove all elements of a criminal offence beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not the accused’s role to have to prove their innocence, yet that is precisely what a spouse, teacher or doctor (or mother!) may have to do, to avoid conviction. The right to silence also goes out the window.
A bizarre consequence of section 93X is that priests, ministers of religion and other clergy are completely unprotected. They have no defence at all, not even the right to come to Court to prove their association reasonable. Many others such as social workers, trade union members and officials and even fellow members of sporting or social clubs, fall into the same category.
A further important objection is the arbitrary power these laws deliver into the hands of police officers. Bikies have already been charged under these new provisions and say they will appeal any convictions to the High Court. They may end up being seen as heroes as a result. However, it may be the people of Moree, Walgett and other NSW regions where Indigenous Australians live and work, who may be the most vulnerable. Some of these regions have higher crime rates and Aboriginal people are therefore much more susceptible to arbitrary police action than elsewhere.
There is a wider problem with this sort of law making. Unfortunately, because of the mainstream media’s obsession with federal politics, a lot of legislation is quickly waved through state parliaments without sufficient scrutiny. The Bill introducing these changes went through with only minor media comment and little public debate.
In NSW, with no Charter of Rights, many politicians neither know nor understand what rights they should be protecting. The NSW Parliament should replicate the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities which is based on the ICCPR. That treaty contains the universal, minimalist position of the world democratic community on civil rights and has been ratified by 167 countries. The Victorian Charter is now supported by the Baillieu Coalition government and there is little logic in Barry O’Farrell’s continued opposition to such a reform.
One thing is certain — until this dopey, repressive, unjust, outrageous piece of legislation is repealed, more Charlie Fosters will be lined up for punishment.
Monday, May 14, 2012
Jails' new advocate
Heath Aston | Sun Herald | May 13, 2012
Prison officers will be able to air their grievances to an independent body without fear of retribution in one of the biggest shake-ups of the NSW jail system.
An inspector of prisons will be appointed in tandem with a new Corrective Services Commissioner, The Sun-Herald can reveal. The new position will be announced by the state government today, just weeks after it showed long-time Commissioner Ron Woodham the door.
The inspector of custodial services will work with Mr Woodham's replacement, but will only answer to Parliament and the Attorney-General, Greg Smith.
Representatives of the state's 3800 prison officers welcomed the creation of the inspectorate but warned the inspector must be allowed to ''implement reform, not just spruik it''.
Mr Smith said the inspector would be a champion for prisons and prisons officers. ''He or she will go into bat for anyone who feels the system can be improved, and anyone who provides information will be protected,'' he said.
''The new position will build public confidence in the justice system and ensure that correctional facilities are safe, secure and operate to a high standard. Prison officers will also be able to air their concerns without fear of being harassed or having their careers prejudiced as a result of assisting an inspector.''
Government sources said the creation of an independent inspector was a direct strike at the opaque structure of the present prison system under the leadership of Mr Woodham, the ''old school'' chief who rose from prison warden to commissioner to hold the top job for the past decade.
Mr Smith was frustrated at being stonewalled when seeking information last year over the death in Grafton jail of Ian Klum, a 52-year-old locked up for traffic offences. Surveillance footage showed prison officers looking on as Mr Klum crawled between cells before later dying of a brain haemorrhage.
Mr Woodham's replacement is expected to be in place by July 1.
The inspector will deal with all complaints from wardens and visitors while prisoners will still take their complaints to the ombudsman.
The position will be legislated in the Inspector of Custodial Services Bill 2012, to be introduced to Parliament shortly.
The inspector, who will be appointed to a five-year term - and can only be reappointed once - is likely to be drawn from the ranks of the judiciary. The independent statutory body led by the inspector will have jurisdiction over all correctional centres, including juvenile institutions, residential facilities, transitional centres and court and police cells managed by Corrective Services or Juvenile Justice.
The position will be modelled on an independent inspector in Western Australia. A similar position exists in systems in England, Scotland and Wales.
Prison officers will be able to air their grievances to an independent body without fear of retribution in one of the biggest shake-ups of the NSW jail system.
An inspector of prisons will be appointed in tandem with a new Corrective Services Commissioner, The Sun-Herald can reveal. The new position will be announced by the state government today, just weeks after it showed long-time Commissioner Ron Woodham the door.
The inspector of custodial services will work with Mr Woodham's replacement, but will only answer to Parliament and the Attorney-General, Greg Smith.
Representatives of the state's 3800 prison officers welcomed the creation of the inspectorate but warned the inspector must be allowed to ''implement reform, not just spruik it''.
Mr Smith said the inspector would be a champion for prisons and prisons officers. ''He or she will go into bat for anyone who feels the system can be improved, and anyone who provides information will be protected,'' he said.
''The new position will build public confidence in the justice system and ensure that correctional facilities are safe, secure and operate to a high standard. Prison officers will also be able to air their concerns without fear of being harassed or having their careers prejudiced as a result of assisting an inspector.''
Government sources said the creation of an independent inspector was a direct strike at the opaque structure of the present prison system under the leadership of Mr Woodham, the ''old school'' chief who rose from prison warden to commissioner to hold the top job for the past decade.
Mr Smith was frustrated at being stonewalled when seeking information last year over the death in Grafton jail of Ian Klum, a 52-year-old locked up for traffic offences. Surveillance footage showed prison officers looking on as Mr Klum crawled between cells before later dying of a brain haemorrhage.
Mr Woodham's replacement is expected to be in place by July 1.
The inspector will deal with all complaints from wardens and visitors while prisoners will still take their complaints to the ombudsman.
The position will be legislated in the Inspector of Custodial Services Bill 2012, to be introduced to Parliament shortly.
The inspector, who will be appointed to a five-year term - and can only be reappointed once - is likely to be drawn from the ranks of the judiciary. The independent statutory body led by the inspector will have jurisdiction over all correctional centres, including juvenile institutions, residential facilities, transitional centres and court and police cells managed by Corrective Services or Juvenile Justice.
The position will be modelled on an independent inspector in Western Australia. A similar position exists in systems in England, Scotland and Wales.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Chief law officer eschews a law-and-order auction for young offenders
Imre Salusinky | The Australian | 21 April 2012
THERE have been some under-performers in the one-year-old NSW Coalition government, and a couple of star turns as well - but for sheer surprise value, nobody has outdone the government's chief law officer, Greg Smith.
As a former high-ranking prosecutor in the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, and coming from the Liberal Party's Right faction, the state's new Attorney-General could have been expected to ramp up the "law-and-order auction" that has been a feature of NSW politics for decades.
Instead, he has done the opposite. Under Smith, the government has begun to explore way of dealing with crime that address causes, rather than simply imposing tougher penalties on perpetrators. In particular, Smith has flagged measures to reduce the number of young people on remand, one of the ugliest features of the criminal justice system in NSW. He's also asked the Law Reform Commission to clean up the dog's breakfast that has become sentencing law in NSW after successive state governments legislated mandatory sentences and non-parole periods to burnish their "tough on crime" credentials.
Smith's judicial appointments have not met any ideological standard but appear to be based on merit and due consultation with key stakeholders. And he's paying the predictable price, being accused of "going soft" on criminals by influential sections of the electronic and print media.
At a youthful 64, Smith is a devout Catholic, plays in a folk group called the Tokens that visits nursing homes, and is a proud grandfather. For him, recent months have been a repeat baptism of fire. During his first months in parliament, in 2007, Labor, disgracefully, trawled through his record as a prosecutor in an effort to portray him as soft on pedophiles.
"I always expected there to be an attack," the Attorney-General tells Inquirer. "The fact that, as a prosecutor, I had experience running some very difficult trials, that made me tougher. Your witnesses may be hostile but that's not the end of it. You can recover your position, as long as you keep calm and keep smiling."
THERE have been some under-performers in the one-year-old NSW Coalition government, and a couple of star turns as well - but for sheer surprise value, nobody has outdone the government's chief law officer, Greg Smith.
As a former high-ranking prosecutor in the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, and coming from the Liberal Party's Right faction, the state's new Attorney-General could have been expected to ramp up the "law-and-order auction" that has been a feature of NSW politics for decades.
Instead, he has done the opposite. Under Smith, the government has begun to explore way of dealing with crime that address causes, rather than simply imposing tougher penalties on perpetrators. In particular, Smith has flagged measures to reduce the number of young people on remand, one of the ugliest features of the criminal justice system in NSW. He's also asked the Law Reform Commission to clean up the dog's breakfast that has become sentencing law in NSW after successive state governments legislated mandatory sentences and non-parole periods to burnish their "tough on crime" credentials.
Smith's judicial appointments have not met any ideological standard but appear to be based on merit and due consultation with key stakeholders. And he's paying the predictable price, being accused of "going soft" on criminals by influential sections of the electronic and print media.
At a youthful 64, Smith is a devout Catholic, plays in a folk group called the Tokens that visits nursing homes, and is a proud grandfather. For him, recent months have been a repeat baptism of fire. During his first months in parliament, in 2007, Labor, disgracefully, trawled through his record as a prosecutor in an effort to portray him as soft on pedophiles.
"I always expected there to be an attack," the Attorney-General tells Inquirer. "The fact that, as a prosecutor, I had experience running some very difficult trials, that made me tougher. Your witnesses may be hostile but that's not the end of it. You can recover your position, as long as you keep calm and keep smiling."
Saturday, April 21, 2012
Ending Sydney’s law-and-order auction
Robert Milliken | Inside Story | 3 April 2012
The NSW attorney-general has taken the politically risky step of trying to reduce the prison population, writes Robert Milliken
NSW attorney-general Greg Smith (above, right) and security manager Patrick Aboud viewing the 300-bed drug treatment facility for prisoners at the state’s John Morony Correctional Complex.
Photo: Kate Geraghty/ Fairfax
WHEN Sydney’s southwest suburbs suffered a wave of drive-by shootings early this year, the city’s tabloid press and notorious radio shock jocks went into overdrive. Their target was Greg Smith, who is about to complete his first year as attorney-general in Barry O’Farrell’s state government. In most respects, Smith is a classic conservative Liberal: a barrister, and former public prosecutor, who represents the leafy electorate of Epping. His Sydney north shore constituency is a world away from the streets on the other side of town where rival gangs of young men shot up each other’s homes in an intimidating display of turf warfare.
In one regard, though, Smith is something of a radical. After sixteen years of state Labor governments, he came to power promising to reform the state’s prison system. Instead of locking more people up, Smith has pledged to find formulas to allow many minor offenders and young criminals to be rehabilitated and then let go.
Sydney’s Daily Telegraph has waged an unrelenting campaign against Smith. It calls him “Marshmallow Smith,” and accuses him of going “soft on crime.” In one extraordinary front page splash in early February, the paper claimed: “Exclusive: Gays, Minorities Get Bail but the Rest… Go Straight to Jail.” The piece claimed to be based on a draft report by the NSW Law Reform Commission, which Smith had not seen. Media hype of this sort threatens to unsettle the government, in a political climate in which law-and-order auctions are the name of the game: both sides compete in proving to voters that they are the toughest on crime.
Smith claims to be unmoved. “The whole hardline approach against crime has been a failure in many places,” he tells me. “This attempt to make me look softer misrepresents what I am trying to do. I am trying to turn people away from crime. It’s not soft, it’s being more pragmatic.”
The challenge Smith faces in testing his pragmatic approach is daunting. Australia spends $11.5 billion a year on law and order, about $511 a year per person. The dubious honour for the biggest spending goes to New South Wales. In evidence late last year to a parliamentary estimates committee, and in a speech to a solicitors’ conference in Sydney, Smith painted a chilling picture.
Within two years of their release, 43 per cent of NSW prisoners reoffend, compared with just under 37 per cent in Victoria, for example, and less than 30 per cent in Tasmania. (The Australian Capital Territory will start reporting on recidivism from 2011–12.) This high recidivism rate accompanies another grim profile: of 15,000 people taken into custody in New South Wales in 2007–08, almost two-thirds were affected by drugs or alcohol when they committed their most serious offences.
Smith’s state also has the highest number of prisoners on remand in Australia. Over the ten years to October 2011, the number of adults held on remand rose by 86 per cent. More worryingly, more than four-fifths of the juveniles held on remand were eventually set free with non-custodial sentences. Locking these young people up, when their crimes are finally found not to deserve such punishment, simply creates more problems, says Smith: “They spend a long time being exposed to a university of crime among prisoners.”
NSW attorney-general Greg Smith (above, right) and security manager Patrick Aboud viewing the 300-bed drug treatment facility for prisoners at the state’s John Morony Correctional Complex.
Photo: Kate Geraghty/ Fairfax
WHEN Sydney’s southwest suburbs suffered a wave of drive-by shootings early this year, the city’s tabloid press and notorious radio shock jocks went into overdrive. Their target was Greg Smith, who is about to complete his first year as attorney-general in Barry O’Farrell’s state government. In most respects, Smith is a classic conservative Liberal: a barrister, and former public prosecutor, who represents the leafy electorate of Epping. His Sydney north shore constituency is a world away from the streets on the other side of town where rival gangs of young men shot up each other’s homes in an intimidating display of turf warfare.
In one regard, though, Smith is something of a radical. After sixteen years of state Labor governments, he came to power promising to reform the state’s prison system. Instead of locking more people up, Smith has pledged to find formulas to allow many minor offenders and young criminals to be rehabilitated and then let go.
Sydney’s Daily Telegraph has waged an unrelenting campaign against Smith. It calls him “Marshmallow Smith,” and accuses him of going “soft on crime.” In one extraordinary front page splash in early February, the paper claimed: “Exclusive: Gays, Minorities Get Bail but the Rest… Go Straight to Jail.” The piece claimed to be based on a draft report by the NSW Law Reform Commission, which Smith had not seen. Media hype of this sort threatens to unsettle the government, in a political climate in which law-and-order auctions are the name of the game: both sides compete in proving to voters that they are the toughest on crime.
Smith claims to be unmoved. “The whole hardline approach against crime has been a failure in many places,” he tells me. “This attempt to make me look softer misrepresents what I am trying to do. I am trying to turn people away from crime. It’s not soft, it’s being more pragmatic.”
The challenge Smith faces in testing his pragmatic approach is daunting. Australia spends $11.5 billion a year on law and order, about $511 a year per person. The dubious honour for the biggest spending goes to New South Wales. In evidence late last year to a parliamentary estimates committee, and in a speech to a solicitors’ conference in Sydney, Smith painted a chilling picture.
Within two years of their release, 43 per cent of NSW prisoners reoffend, compared with just under 37 per cent in Victoria, for example, and less than 30 per cent in Tasmania. (The Australian Capital Territory will start reporting on recidivism from 2011–12.) This high recidivism rate accompanies another grim profile: of 15,000 people taken into custody in New South Wales in 2007–08, almost two-thirds were affected by drugs or alcohol when they committed their most serious offences.
Smith’s state also has the highest number of prisoners on remand in Australia. Over the ten years to October 2011, the number of adults held on remand rose by 86 per cent. More worryingly, more than four-fifths of the juveniles held on remand were eventually set free with non-custodial sentences. Locking these young people up, when their crimes are finally found not to deserve such punishment, simply creates more problems, says Smith: “They spend a long time being exposed to a university of crime among prisoners.”
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
The Lukewarm Attomey
Andrew Elder | Politically Homeless | 09 April 2012
So then, because thou art luke-warm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit thee out of my mouth.
- Revelation 3:16
NSW Attorney General Greg Smith is in grave danger politically. His agenda needs to be clearer than it is, and stronger, if he is to survive. If he goes on as he is he'll become a bigger target for the opposition than Robyn Parker is but without the personal affection and entrenched political support that Parker can command.
Smith came out of the NSW Labor Right and the broader Liberal Party gave him one of their safest seats, Epping, in 2007. Say what you like about the hopelessness of the NSW Liberals, but it is a genuine pity that former Epping MP Andrew Tink had to retire through ill-health and never became a minister while [take your pick from any NSW ALP arseclown who became a state government minister in their spare time] did. Liberals love all that prodigal-son stuff. Smith was spared the indignity of powerlessness that afflicts other fence-jumpers and blow-ins through a Faustian bargain with the Christianist far right faction headed by David Clarke. As with all Faustian bargains it was probably a lot of fun while it lasted.
This article tells us the bargain is off.
The idea of attacking barristers because of their clientele is bullshit. It is both a deliberate misunderstanding and misrepresentation of how the Anglo-Australian legal system works, and a cack-handed attempt to import the worst tactics of US Republicans posing as people of principle when playing partisan silly-buggers. This post by Andrew Tiedt goes into more and better detail on this. Insofar as there was any substance to Phelps' attack it can be brushed aside easily. What's significant here is the politics.
Smith came out of the NSW Labor Right and the broader Liberal Party gave him one of their safest seats, Epping, in 2007. Say what you like about the hopelessness of the NSW Liberals, but it is a genuine pity that former Epping MP Andrew Tink had to retire through ill-health and never became a minister while [take your pick from any NSW ALP arseclown who became a state government minister in their spare time] did. Liberals love all that prodigal-son stuff. Smith was spared the indignity of powerlessness that afflicts other fence-jumpers and blow-ins through a Faustian bargain with the Christianist far right faction headed by David Clarke. As with all Faustian bargains it was probably a lot of fun while it lasted.
This article tells us the bargain is off.
The idea of attacking barristers because of their clientele is bullshit. It is both a deliberate misunderstanding and misrepresentation of how the Anglo-Australian legal system works, and a cack-handed attempt to import the worst tactics of US Republicans posing as people of principle when playing partisan silly-buggers. This post by Andrew Tiedt goes into more and better detail on this. Insofar as there was any substance to Phelps' attack it can be brushed aside easily. What's significant here is the politics.
Sunday, April 8, 2012
Liberals put Attorney-General Greg Smith on trial
Barclay Crawford | The Sunday Telegraph | April 08, 2012
ATTORNEY-GENERAL Greg Smith has come under fire from within his own party for appointing judges with a history of defending accused terrorists.
Peter Phelps MLC said Mr Smith needed to explain why he believed his last three judicial appointments were appropriate for "a conservative government", given their records as barristers.
The Sunday Telegraph has been told Mr Phelps' concerns - raised in the government's closed party room before Parliament met on Monday - echo growing fears within the party about Mr Smith's alleged "Left leanings" and "soft on crime" stance on judicial issues.
While Mr Phelps refused to comment on the altercation, saying his "one rule in politics is not to discuss party room in public", a number of other MPs have confirmed his attack on the Attorney-General.
Mr Smith's controversial appointments were made last month when Robert Beech-Jones, SC, Peter Maiden, SC, and Chris Hoy, SC, were all sworn in.
Mr Beech-Jones, who was appointed to the Supreme Court on March 1, appeared for former Guantanamo Bay detainee and accused terrorist Mamdouh Habib, while Mr Hoy, who was appointed a judge in the District Court on March 15, was part of the legal team which appeared in the High Court seeking the release and repatriation from Guantanamo Bay of David Hicks.
Mr Hicks was convicted of terrorist offences for his time in Afghanistan and Pakistan training with al-Qaeda.
Meanwhile, Mr Maiden, who was appointed to the District Court on March 7, defended disgraced Labor minister Milton Orkopoulos, jailed for 13 years for having sex with underage boys he had plied with drugs.
One MP said you could have "heard a pin drop" when Mr Phelps began questioning the Attorney-General.
Another MP said that many within the government were concerned with Mr Smith's political leanings, which were often "closer to the Left of the Labor party on issues of prisoner rehabilitation and sentencing".
"The first party he joined was the Labor Party. He doesn't have a Liberal Party bone in his body," one MP said. "He's being called the softest Attorney-General ever.
"This is not a good look for a conservative government. We want to be seen to be tough on crime."
Mr Smith, a former member of the Labor Party, responded to Mr Phelps' concerns by saying he had worked with at least one of the men during his time as a prosecutor.
Mr Smith also said he had great faith in their judgment and ability and his spokesman defended the decision to appoint the three barristers and lashed out at Mr Phelps.
"Is he [Mr Phelps] going to suggest that everyone who acted as a public defender is unsuitable? That would rule out a lot of judges," he said.
"Advocates are sometimes required to represent unpopular clients and it is part of the strength of our justice system that leading silks take on this duty. It's called the cab-rank principle."
ATTORNEY-GENERAL Greg Smith has come under fire from within his own party for appointing judges with a history of defending accused terrorists.
Peter Phelps MLC said Mr Smith needed to explain why he believed his last three judicial appointments were appropriate for "a conservative government", given their records as barristers.
The Sunday Telegraph has been told Mr Phelps' concerns - raised in the government's closed party room before Parliament met on Monday - echo growing fears within the party about Mr Smith's alleged "Left leanings" and "soft on crime" stance on judicial issues.
While Mr Phelps refused to comment on the altercation, saying his "one rule in politics is not to discuss party room in public", a number of other MPs have confirmed his attack on the Attorney-General.
Mr Smith's controversial appointments were made last month when Robert Beech-Jones, SC, Peter Maiden, SC, and Chris Hoy, SC, were all sworn in.
Mr Beech-Jones, who was appointed to the Supreme Court on March 1, appeared for former Guantanamo Bay detainee and accused terrorist Mamdouh Habib, while Mr Hoy, who was appointed a judge in the District Court on March 15, was part of the legal team which appeared in the High Court seeking the release and repatriation from Guantanamo Bay of David Hicks.
Mr Hicks was convicted of terrorist offences for his time in Afghanistan and Pakistan training with al-Qaeda.
Meanwhile, Mr Maiden, who was appointed to the District Court on March 7, defended disgraced Labor minister Milton Orkopoulos, jailed for 13 years for having sex with underage boys he had plied with drugs.
One MP said you could have "heard a pin drop" when Mr Phelps began questioning the Attorney-General.
Another MP said that many within the government were concerned with Mr Smith's political leanings, which were often "closer to the Left of the Labor party on issues of prisoner rehabilitation and sentencing".
"The first party he joined was the Labor Party. He doesn't have a Liberal Party bone in his body," one MP said. "He's being called the softest Attorney-General ever.
"This is not a good look for a conservative government. We want to be seen to be tough on crime."
Mr Smith, a former member of the Labor Party, responded to Mr Phelps' concerns by saying he had worked with at least one of the men during his time as a prosecutor.
Mr Smith also said he had great faith in their judgment and ability and his spokesman defended the decision to appoint the three barristers and lashed out at Mr Phelps.
"Is he [Mr Phelps] going to suggest that everyone who acted as a public defender is unsuitable? That would rule out a lot of judges," he said.
"Advocates are sometimes required to represent unpopular clients and it is part of the strength of our justice system that leading silks take on this duty. It's called the cab-rank principle."
Monday, April 2, 2012
AG Greg Smith's speech to Public Defender's Conference
Speech by Greg Smith SC MP, Attorney General and Minister for Justice to
open the Public Defender’s Conference, Saturday 24 March 2012 at Taronga
Park Zoo Conference Centre.
This Monday marks the first anniversary of the election of the O'Farrell Government.
For the past week we have had the pleasure of getting up at 5.30 and going out to
railway stations handing out little cards telling people what good things we’ve done
and they are saying: what’s up?, Is there an election on? But we have had a very
good reception.
I am pleased to say the firm agenda I set in opposition – with the backing of the
Coalition –which was that there would be no law and order auction at the last
election, has been honoured by us. And I think Labor was becoming weary of it.
They didn’t try to counter with a one sided auction – no grid sentencing, or more
maximum life sentences, no extra aggravated offences, no standard non parole
periods – which had coloured the previous 20 years of elections.
Unlike previous governments, our State plan does not demand a certain number of
arrests or prisoners. Take section 22A of the Bail Act; it allowed only one application
for bail and had a particular impact on young people - especially for those who
breached curfews. There are now are 150 people a week in juvenile detention
centres who will never receive a custodial sentence.
I promised we would open a second metropolitan drug court – I expect that will up
and running in May – and the first intensive drug treatment facility in a NSW jail. We
have done that at the John Morony complex at Windsor. In late February the first 62
prisoners started and within two years I hope we have 300 prisoners – 250 men, 50
women - undergoing treatment that will last for about six months. They will be linking
up with the non-government organisations after their release so they can continue
their treatment.
Drug addiction can be a lifelong struggle and my hope is that this program will help a
lot of people to turn their lives around and make a positive contribution to the
community. If they can get off the drugs, get a job, get somewhere to live and help –
rather than just being thrown into jail and let out with the same problems – it will be
better for the community. We will have more citizens who might have been
permanent criminals going straight and the community will be safer. And hopefully
the perceptions of safety will increase because that is one of our big problems.
Fanned by publicity and sensation, there is a perception out in the suburbs of
Sydney that it’s dangerous out there, in the night, even in the day.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Bombastic voices aiming to shout down the Attorney-General
Richard Ackland | SMH | February 10, 2012
"There is a misguided perception that the legal community is soft on crime and out of touch with community expectations" ... Chief Justice of NSW Tom Bathurst. Photo: Wolter Peeters
The Chief Justice of NSW, Tom Bathurst, issued the annual rallying cry to lawyers at Parliament House's new law term banquet. That was on the night of January 30. Part of his speech was about the crisis of confidence faced by the criminal justice system.
''Community trust in the system is eroding. Much of this distrust is fuelled by misinformation that is propagated by sections of the media who prefer to inflame rather than inform … There is a misguided perception that the legal community is soft on crime and out of touch with community expectations.''
The next available issue of The Daily Telegraph promptly splashed on page one with a fine piece of confected inflammation: ''Exclusive: Gays, minorities get bail but the rest … Go Straight to Jail.''
Advertisement: Story continues below
Accompanying the exclusive was a little graphic of the NSW Attorney-General, Greg Smith, in pink, captioned: ''Marshmallow man: Greg Smith.'' By asking the NSW Law Reform Commission to review the Bail Act, the Attorney-General seems to have confirmed in many minds that he is a big, fat, pink softie who presumably will melt when heat is applied.
The fact that the Attorney-General hasn't yet received the report of the commission, or considered any proposals for reform, or put them to cabinet is beside the point.
"There is a misguided perception that the legal community is soft on crime and out of touch with community expectations" ... Chief Justice of NSW Tom Bathurst. Photo: Wolter Peeters
The Chief Justice of NSW, Tom Bathurst, issued the annual rallying cry to lawyers at Parliament House's new law term banquet. That was on the night of January 30. Part of his speech was about the crisis of confidence faced by the criminal justice system.
''Community trust in the system is eroding. Much of this distrust is fuelled by misinformation that is propagated by sections of the media who prefer to inflame rather than inform … There is a misguided perception that the legal community is soft on crime and out of touch with community expectations.''
The next available issue of The Daily Telegraph promptly splashed on page one with a fine piece of confected inflammation: ''Exclusive: Gays, minorities get bail but the rest … Go Straight to Jail.''
Advertisement: Story continues below
Accompanying the exclusive was a little graphic of the NSW Attorney-General, Greg Smith, in pink, captioned: ''Marshmallow man: Greg Smith.'' By asking the NSW Law Reform Commission to review the Bail Act, the Attorney-General seems to have confirmed in many minds that he is a big, fat, pink softie who presumably will melt when heat is applied.
The fact that the Attorney-General hasn't yet received the report of the commission, or considered any proposals for reform, or put them to cabinet is beside the point.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Alan Jones interviews Greg Smith
Alan Jones | 2GB Radio | 31 January 2012
Listen to interview between Alan Jones and Greg Smith here, regarding the bail review and other matters.
Unlike his 2GB morning counterpart, Jones seems prepared to give Smith a fair hearing on his proposed criminal justice reforms.
Listen to interview between Alan Jones and Greg Smith here, regarding the bail review and other matters.
Unlike his 2GB morning counterpart, Jones seems prepared to give Smith a fair hearing on his proposed criminal justice reforms.
NSW poised to revamp bail laws
Waleed Aly | ABC RN Drive | 7 February 2012
Listen to interview here
Listen to interview here
The bail laws in NSW are the toughest in the country. The state's bail act has been amended no less than 32 times since it was introduced in 1978 and as it stands now, there is effectively a presumption against bail for many offences.
Now the State Coalition Government is seriously looking at softening these laws. An issue that has been of particular concern for some time is growing numbers of young people who are being denied bail and held in jail, only to stand trial and find out they have no sentence to serve.
The man charged with weighing up possible amendments to the Bail Act is the NSW Attorney General Greg Smith and he spoke with Waleed Aly.
Now the State Coalition Government is seriously looking at softening these laws. An issue that has been of particular concern for some time is growing numbers of young people who are being denied bail and held in jail, only to stand trial and find out they have no sentence to serve.
The man charged with weighing up possible amendments to the Bail Act is the NSW Attorney General Greg Smith and he spoke with Waleed Aly.
Prison plan always on the cards
Heath Aston | SMH | January 29, 2012
BEFORE entering politics, Greg Smith spent a career in the courtroom as a Crown prosecutor. So he knows a thing or two about how words can be twisted to suit a purpose.
But even he must have been surprised by the tenuousness of the recent attacks on him for supposedly going soft on crime. The NSW Attorney-General was in the sights of the tabloid press and talkback radio last week for asking the Law Reform Commission to find ways to reduce the headcount in prisons.
Any move to alter the Crimes Act and increase non-custodial sentences is obviously one of extreme public interest and should be debated thoroughly. But the story quickly evolved into how Smith had been a tough talker in opposition only to turn into a big softie in government. Quotes were dug out that seemed to portray the Attorney-General as having been an old-school ''lock-'em-up'' conservative while in opposition.
The truth is basically the opposite.
Take the very first line of a story I wrote in July 2010: ''A Coalition state government would slash the NSW prison population by a fifth by taking prisoners with mental-health problems out of the criminal justice system and reducing sentences for a range of 'less serious' crimes.
''Shadow attorney-general Greg Smith said he was planning to reduce the headcount inside NSW jails, which is set to push past 11,000 …
''The Coalition's reformist agenda, which would reduce sentences for minor drug offences, minor assaults, theft and fraud, is part of a calculated gamble to prevent the election in March descending into the traditional law-and-order auction for who can crack down hardest on crime.''
There were numerous other articles that covered Smith's desire to reduce the number of graduates from the ''universities of crime'' he considers adult jails to be.
BEFORE entering politics, Greg Smith spent a career in the courtroom as a Crown prosecutor. So he knows a thing or two about how words can be twisted to suit a purpose.
But even he must have been surprised by the tenuousness of the recent attacks on him for supposedly going soft on crime. The NSW Attorney-General was in the sights of the tabloid press and talkback radio last week for asking the Law Reform Commission to find ways to reduce the headcount in prisons.
Any move to alter the Crimes Act and increase non-custodial sentences is obviously one of extreme public interest and should be debated thoroughly. But the story quickly evolved into how Smith had been a tough talker in opposition only to turn into a big softie in government. Quotes were dug out that seemed to portray the Attorney-General as having been an old-school ''lock-'em-up'' conservative while in opposition.
The truth is basically the opposite.
Take the very first line of a story I wrote in July 2010: ''A Coalition state government would slash the NSW prison population by a fifth by taking prisoners with mental-health problems out of the criminal justice system and reducing sentences for a range of 'less serious' crimes.
''Shadow attorney-general Greg Smith said he was planning to reduce the headcount inside NSW jails, which is set to push past 11,000 …
''The Coalition's reformist agenda, which would reduce sentences for minor drug offences, minor assaults, theft and fraud, is part of a calculated gamble to prevent the election in March descending into the traditional law-and-order auction for who can crack down hardest on crime.''
There were numerous other articles that covered Smith's desire to reduce the number of graduates from the ''universities of crime'' he considers adult jails to be.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Hardline A-G hits back at his critics
Anna Patty | SMH | February 3, 2012
It didn't take long for the vitriol over the state government's approach to law and order to start.
Ten months after the NSW election, the opposition and tabloid media have been dishing it out to the Attorney-General, Greg Smith, accusing him of being soft on crime.
One radio talk-back host recently accused Smith of being a step away from the Greens, saying he had failed to earn his stripes as a conservative Attorney-General.
When it comes to the rehabilitation of non-violent offenders, Smith would agree.
He says he is "more left-wing on issues like dealing with prisoners and rehabilitation than any other Attorney-General in the country".
But Smith, reputed as a tough public prosecutor when he worked for the DPP - having put away murderers including those who killed policeman David Carty - is hardline when it comes to serious violence.
In response to a recent spate of drive-by shootings in Sydney's south-west, the opposition and some commentators have confused the distinction Smith has made between his different approaches to sentencing and rehabilitation.
He believes in non-custodial sentences for less serious offenders and rehabilitation for people with drug and alcohol addiction or mental health problems.
When it comes to people guilty of serious violent crime, including the "buffoons" responsible for the shootings, repeat offenders and those guilty of child sex offences, Smith wants to toughen punishments.
Smith recently asked the Supreme Court to look at how judgments against people convicted of sex offences against children could be strengthened.
It didn't take long for the vitriol over the state government's approach to law and order to start.
Ten months after the NSW election, the opposition and tabloid media have been dishing it out to the Attorney-General, Greg Smith, accusing him of being soft on crime.
One radio talk-back host recently accused Smith of being a step away from the Greens, saying he had failed to earn his stripes as a conservative Attorney-General.
When it comes to the rehabilitation of non-violent offenders, Smith would agree.
He says he is "more left-wing on issues like dealing with prisoners and rehabilitation than any other Attorney-General in the country".
But Smith, reputed as a tough public prosecutor when he worked for the DPP - having put away murderers including those who killed policeman David Carty - is hardline when it comes to serious violence.
In response to a recent spate of drive-by shootings in Sydney's south-west, the opposition and some commentators have confused the distinction Smith has made between his different approaches to sentencing and rehabilitation.
He believes in non-custodial sentences for less serious offenders and rehabilitation for people with drug and alcohol addiction or mental health problems.
When it comes to people guilty of serious violent crime, including the "buffoons" responsible for the shootings, repeat offenders and those guilty of child sex offences, Smith wants to toughen punishments.
Smith recently asked the Supreme Court to look at how judgments against people convicted of sex offences against children could be strengthened.
Youth bail laws to be eased in NSW
Imre Salusinsky | The Australian | February 7, 2012
BAIL laws in NSW will be reformed in a push by the state government to reduce the number of young people in jail.
NSW Attorney-General Greg Smith has confirmed to The Australian the changes are likely to include exempting accused juveniles from tough provisions introduced to the bail act in 2007, which limited the right of accused offenders to make repeated applications for bail once an initial bid was refused.
At about 400, the number of juveniles in detention in NSW is the highest in the country.
About half are on remand -- a proportion that spiked following the new provisions.
"Once they get into detention, their prospects of returning to a normal life are diminished," Mr Smith said said of accused offenders aged under 18.
"There are currently more juveniles on remand than are serving detention. They're being exposed to more serious young criminals while they are there."
He said the 2007 changes "did seem to impact in a more prejudicial way on juveniles than it did on adult prisoners".
BAIL laws in NSW will be reformed in a push by the state government to reduce the number of young people in jail.
NSW Attorney-General Greg Smith has confirmed to The Australian the changes are likely to include exempting accused juveniles from tough provisions introduced to the bail act in 2007, which limited the right of accused offenders to make repeated applications for bail once an initial bid was refused.
At about 400, the number of juveniles in detention in NSW is the highest in the country.
About half are on remand -- a proportion that spiked following the new provisions.
"Once they get into detention, their prospects of returning to a normal life are diminished," Mr Smith said said of accused offenders aged under 18.
"There are currently more juveniles on remand than are serving detention. They're being exposed to more serious young criminals while they are there."
He said the 2007 changes "did seem to impact in a more prejudicial way on juveniles than it did on adult prisoners".
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Radio attack dogs fail to shake lawman
Sean Nicholls | SMH | 26 November 2011
There are two inevitable rites of passage for any new NSW attorney-general.
One is a war of words with the Director of Public Prosecutions over funding and the merits of ''tough on crime'' legislation. The other, ironically, is being periodically bludgeoned by talkback radio hosts for being too ''soft on crime''.
In his first nine months in the job, the Attorney-General, Greg Smith, has managed to neatly sidestep the first, thanks largely to the retirement of Nicholas Cowdery and the appointment of the far less outspoken Lloyd Babb as the state's DPP.
But the lack of fireworks in this area has been more than compensated for by a spectacular clash with 2GB's morning presenter, Ray Hadley.
To recap: Smith, the member for Epping, is accused of making sneering comments about Hadley's audience and the readers of the Sydney Daily Telegraph at a Liberal Party Christmas function a week ago.
Hadley's audience were ''red necks'', while Tele readers were ''bigoted fools'', Smith is alleged to have said.
No doubt there are many who would wholeheartedly agree with the former assessment, especially given the quality of the debate generated by Hadley's relentless pursuit of the asylum seekers issue.
But naturally, and understandably, the radio host has taken deep offence at the slur on behalf of his listeners and has proceeded to tear strips off Smith in a series of blistering tirades, despite the A-G's strenuous denials.
(It should be noted that Hadley's three ''sources'' have not been named and none has been willing to go on the record to contradict Smith's version of events. This has been put down to the Liberal Party rule that threatens expulsion for members who discuss internal party matters in public - but it is quite a stretch to classify a Christmas party bash as official party business.)
While Hadley's complaints have focused on defending his audience's reputation, the dispute appears to have emerged from both men's very different relationship with the NSW Corrective Services Commissioner, Ron Woodham. Last month it was announced that Woodham, a veteran in the position, would have his contract renewed for only six months. This followed some pointed comments by Smith on the need for ''culture change'' in the NSW prison system to improve the treatment of prisoners, recently revisited by him over two deaths in custody that have become the subject of inquests.
It is the impression that Smith is critical of the culture that has flourished under Woodham's leadership, and that he is planning to get rid of Woodham to change it, that appears to have enraged Hadley.
Intriguingly, the attack on Smith has coincided with a stampede by media organisations for the right to document the life and times of the prisons boss. The ABC's Australian Story is believed to have been chasing Woodham with a proposal for a profile, as has Foxtel. The third bidder is Graham McNeice Productions, which wants to pitch a program to Channel Nine. Hadley is understood to have introduced Woodham to the production company.
Smith has so far weathered the storm with dignity and has refused to be cowed by Hadley's attacks. He has given as good as he has received and deserves to be congratulated for that. There seems to be a feeling among Sydney's talkback hosts that if they go hard enough, they will eventually get their way. And why wouldn't they, given how well it has worked in the past?
Smith, nine months into his term as Attorney-General, has an early opportunity to change that.
There are two inevitable rites of passage for any new NSW attorney-general.
One is a war of words with the Director of Public Prosecutions over funding and the merits of ''tough on crime'' legislation. The other, ironically, is being periodically bludgeoned by talkback radio hosts for being too ''soft on crime''.
In his first nine months in the job, the Attorney-General, Greg Smith, has managed to neatly sidestep the first, thanks largely to the retirement of Nicholas Cowdery and the appointment of the far less outspoken Lloyd Babb as the state's DPP.
But the lack of fireworks in this area has been more than compensated for by a spectacular clash with 2GB's morning presenter, Ray Hadley.
To recap: Smith, the member for Epping, is accused of making sneering comments about Hadley's audience and the readers of the Sydney Daily Telegraph at a Liberal Party Christmas function a week ago.
Hadley's audience were ''red necks'', while Tele readers were ''bigoted fools'', Smith is alleged to have said.
No doubt there are many who would wholeheartedly agree with the former assessment, especially given the quality of the debate generated by Hadley's relentless pursuit of the asylum seekers issue.
But naturally, and understandably, the radio host has taken deep offence at the slur on behalf of his listeners and has proceeded to tear strips off Smith in a series of blistering tirades, despite the A-G's strenuous denials.
(It should be noted that Hadley's three ''sources'' have not been named and none has been willing to go on the record to contradict Smith's version of events. This has been put down to the Liberal Party rule that threatens expulsion for members who discuss internal party matters in public - but it is quite a stretch to classify a Christmas party bash as official party business.)
While Hadley's complaints have focused on defending his audience's reputation, the dispute appears to have emerged from both men's very different relationship with the NSW Corrective Services Commissioner, Ron Woodham. Last month it was announced that Woodham, a veteran in the position, would have his contract renewed for only six months. This followed some pointed comments by Smith on the need for ''culture change'' in the NSW prison system to improve the treatment of prisoners, recently revisited by him over two deaths in custody that have become the subject of inquests.
It is the impression that Smith is critical of the culture that has flourished under Woodham's leadership, and that he is planning to get rid of Woodham to change it, that appears to have enraged Hadley.
Intriguingly, the attack on Smith has coincided with a stampede by media organisations for the right to document the life and times of the prisons boss. The ABC's Australian Story is believed to have been chasing Woodham with a proposal for a profile, as has Foxtel. The third bidder is Graham McNeice Productions, which wants to pitch a program to Channel Nine. Hadley is understood to have introduced Woodham to the production company.
Smith has so far weathered the storm with dignity and has refused to be cowed by Hadley's attacks. He has given as good as he has received and deserves to be congratulated for that. There seems to be a feeling among Sydney's talkback hosts that if they go hard enough, they will eventually get their way. And why wouldn't they, given how well it has worked in the past?
Smith, nine months into his term as Attorney-General, has an early opportunity to change that.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
NSW Attorney-General Greg Smith in row with shock jock Ray Hadley
Nick Leys | The Australian | 22 November 2011
NSW Attorney-General Greg Smith has engaged in a slanging match with Sydney shock jock Ray Hadley over claims he called his listeners "rednecks" and readers of the city's daily tabloid "bigoted fools".
Sources in the Liberal Party claim Mr Smith made the comments at a Liberal branch Christmas party on Saturday night in Beecroft in Sydney's northwest.
Hadley, an often controversial radio presenter and a columnist for The Daily Telegraph, told 2GB listeners yesterday he was "disappointed" to hear of the comments, given his support for the Attorney-General.
"Apparently and allegedly -- and this has been confirmed by three sources, including people who took a transcript of Mr Smith's off-the-cuff speech -- he spoke at length about the 'rednecks' who listen to my program . . . you, his constituents," Hadley said. "And he spoke in detail about the bigoted fools who read The Daily Telegraph. He spoke about my support of a public servant whom he didn't name and my continued support of this public servant, a public servant he wants to get rid of, apparently, but whom the Premier has expressed a desire to keep."
During a seven-minute conversation that dropped out twice, Hadley and Mr Smith then argued about what was said and whether the Attorney-General supports NSW prisons boss Ron Woodham.
Hadley accused Mr Smith of "going back to your Labor Party ways" -- a reference to his membership of the party nearly 20 years ago.
Several times Mr Smith denied the remarks, but he admitted using the term "rednecks" when discussing people who "supported a culture in NSW prisons that existed in the past".
"I have been taken out of context," he said.
"Clearly I have some people in the Liberal Party who will do anything to poison you or poison you towards me."
The slanging match ended when Mr Smith's line dropped out for a second time.
Yesterday, the Attorney-General released a statement, in which he declared: "I did not disparage readers of The Daily Telegraph in any way.
"In fact, I said that while they normally take an aggressive line on law and order, the Telegraph and radio stations 2GB and 2UE had been prepared to give the government a fair go as we argue success on law and order should not be judged alone in terms of how tough sentences are or how many people are locked up."
Hadley could not be contacted yesterday.
Listen to the interview here
and some more Hadley ranting on Smith the next day
NSW Attorney-General Greg Smith has engaged in a slanging match with Sydney shock jock Ray Hadley over claims he called his listeners "rednecks" and readers of the city's daily tabloid "bigoted fools".
Sources in the Liberal Party claim Mr Smith made the comments at a Liberal branch Christmas party on Saturday night in Beecroft in Sydney's northwest.
Hadley, an often controversial radio presenter and a columnist for The Daily Telegraph, told 2GB listeners yesterday he was "disappointed" to hear of the comments, given his support for the Attorney-General.
"Apparently and allegedly -- and this has been confirmed by three sources, including people who took a transcript of Mr Smith's off-the-cuff speech -- he spoke at length about the 'rednecks' who listen to my program . . . you, his constituents," Hadley said. "And he spoke in detail about the bigoted fools who read The Daily Telegraph. He spoke about my support of a public servant whom he didn't name and my continued support of this public servant, a public servant he wants to get rid of, apparently, but whom the Premier has expressed a desire to keep."
During a seven-minute conversation that dropped out twice, Hadley and Mr Smith then argued about what was said and whether the Attorney-General supports NSW prisons boss Ron Woodham.
Hadley accused Mr Smith of "going back to your Labor Party ways" -- a reference to his membership of the party nearly 20 years ago.
Several times Mr Smith denied the remarks, but he admitted using the term "rednecks" when discussing people who "supported a culture in NSW prisons that existed in the past".
"I have been taken out of context," he said.
"Clearly I have some people in the Liberal Party who will do anything to poison you or poison you towards me."
The slanging match ended when Mr Smith's line dropped out for a second time.
Yesterday, the Attorney-General released a statement, in which he declared: "I did not disparage readers of The Daily Telegraph in any way.
"In fact, I said that while they normally take an aggressive line on law and order, the Telegraph and radio stations 2GB and 2UE had been prepared to give the government a fair go as we argue success on law and order should not be judged alone in terms of how tough sentences are or how many people are locked up."
Hadley could not be contacted yesterday.
Listen to the interview here
and some more Hadley ranting on Smith the next day
Attorney-General Greg Smith stung by Ray Hadley
Andrew Clennell | The Daily Telegraph | 22 November 2011
War of words ... Attorney-General Greg Smith and Ray Hadley. Source: The Daily Telegraph
UPDATE 11.59am THE head of the prison officers' union has joined an attack by broadcaster Ray Hadley on Attorney-General Greg Smith, saying Mr Smith's comments about the culture in the prison system are "absolutely disgusting".
Mr Hadley said on air today that Mr Smith had lied on his show yesterday over claims a prisoner had been punched and kicked.
Mr Smith had been defending himself yesterday against claims he denied that he had called Mr Hadley's listeners "rednecks" and The Daily Telegraph's readers "bigoted fools" during comments at a Liberal Party function.
Mr Smith had said he had referred to rednecks but: "I don't want to see people treated like dogs, whatever their status in life. You see a man being marched across a room like a dog recently on television and kicked into a prison cell, that man died two days later, there's an inquest on at the moment .. that's what I was talking on the other night."
Mr Hadley said today film footage of the incident concerned had shown a prisoner being "gently" placed in a cell, not kicked.
On Mr Hadley's program, Matt Bindley, the chairman of the Prison Officers Vocational Branch, said he and his members resented comments by Mr Smith that prison officers treated prisoners under the current culture as "like dogs".
"To be told we treat people like dogs ... is absolutely disgusting and we won't tolerate it," Mr Bindley said.
Hadley countered:"`I think he wants [prisons] to be some sort of retirement resort ... where they're [prisoners] going to be namby pambied."
In a fiery on-air exchange yesterday, Mr Smith denied he made the disparaging comments at the Pennant Hills Liberal Christmas party on Saturday night - despite Hadley saying he had three sources backing up the claims.
Hadley had accused Mr Smith of trying to go soft on "murderers and rapists" and seeking to get rid of prisons boss Ron Woodham.
One version of Saturday's function, from solicitor Mark Turnbull, was that Mr Smith referred to "certain redneck radio commentators" who wanted him to go harder on justice policy.
Mr Smith admitted he wanted less prisoners in jail and said he wanted to change a culture where prisoners were being bashed but he claimed Hadley had been misled.
"Clearly I have some people in the Liberal Party who will do anything to poison you towards me," Mr Smith said. Hadley then asked Mr Smith if he had called his listeners rednecks.
"I did not Ray. I talked about rednecks who supported a culture of ... NSW prisons in the past and it was in the context of me saying how upset I was at the treatment of two men who recently died," he said.
Hadley said: "You better be careful because I've spoken to three people ... who say that you called my listeners rednecks and you referred to readers of The Daily Telegraph as bigoted fools."
Mr Smith said: "I might have used the word redneck but it wasn't in specific regard to 2GB."
Berowra MP Philip Ruddock, one of those at the party, would not comment yesterday other than to say he did not recall comments "of that sort".
Mr Smith said last night: "I did not disparage readers of The Daily Telegraph in any way."
War of words ... Attorney-General Greg Smith and Ray Hadley. Source: The Daily Telegraph
UPDATE 11.59am THE head of the prison officers' union has joined an attack by broadcaster Ray Hadley on Attorney-General Greg Smith, saying Mr Smith's comments about the culture in the prison system are "absolutely disgusting".
Mr Hadley said on air today that Mr Smith had lied on his show yesterday over claims a prisoner had been punched and kicked.
Mr Smith had been defending himself yesterday against claims he denied that he had called Mr Hadley's listeners "rednecks" and The Daily Telegraph's readers "bigoted fools" during comments at a Liberal Party function.
Mr Smith had said he had referred to rednecks but: "I don't want to see people treated like dogs, whatever their status in life. You see a man being marched across a room like a dog recently on television and kicked into a prison cell, that man died two days later, there's an inquest on at the moment .. that's what I was talking on the other night."
Mr Hadley said today film footage of the incident concerned had shown a prisoner being "gently" placed in a cell, not kicked.
On Mr Hadley's program, Matt Bindley, the chairman of the Prison Officers Vocational Branch, said he and his members resented comments by Mr Smith that prison officers treated prisoners under the current culture as "like dogs".
"To be told we treat people like dogs ... is absolutely disgusting and we won't tolerate it," Mr Bindley said.
Hadley countered:"`I think he wants [prisons] to be some sort of retirement resort ... where they're [prisoners] going to be namby pambied."
In a fiery on-air exchange yesterday, Mr Smith denied he made the disparaging comments at the Pennant Hills Liberal Christmas party on Saturday night - despite Hadley saying he had three sources backing up the claims.
Hadley had accused Mr Smith of trying to go soft on "murderers and rapists" and seeking to get rid of prisons boss Ron Woodham.
One version of Saturday's function, from solicitor Mark Turnbull, was that Mr Smith referred to "certain redneck radio commentators" who wanted him to go harder on justice policy.
Mr Smith admitted he wanted less prisoners in jail and said he wanted to change a culture where prisoners were being bashed but he claimed Hadley had been misled.
"Clearly I have some people in the Liberal Party who will do anything to poison you towards me," Mr Smith said. Hadley then asked Mr Smith if he had called his listeners rednecks.
"I did not Ray. I talked about rednecks who supported a culture of ... NSW prisons in the past and it was in the context of me saying how upset I was at the treatment of two men who recently died," he said.
Hadley said: "You better be careful because I've spoken to three people ... who say that you called my listeners rednecks and you referred to readers of The Daily Telegraph as bigoted fools."
Mr Smith said: "I might have used the word redneck but it wasn't in specific regard to 2GB."
Berowra MP Philip Ruddock, one of those at the party, would not comment yesterday other than to say he did not recall comments "of that sort".
Mr Smith said last night: "I did not disparage readers of The Daily Telegraph in any way."
Monday, November 21, 2011
AG at Estimates: Bail
General Purpose Standing Committee No 4 | Attorney General and Justice | 26 October 2011
The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: Attorney, I think the final question asked by Mr David Shoebridge related to the Bail Act. Are you able to indicate to the Committee what the current trends are with regard to bail and whether the Government is considering any reform of the bail laws in New South Wales?
The Hon. TREVOR KHAN: Attorney, I think the final question asked by Mr David Shoebridge related to the Bail Act. Are you able to indicate to the Committee what the current trends are with regard to bail and whether the Government is considering any reform of the bail laws in New South Wales?
Mr GREG SMITH: It is a very topical issue; there was an excellent piece in the Sydney Morning Herald today by Geesche Jacobsen in which she referred in some detail to a submission by the Chief Magistrate to the bail review, setting out the magistrate's perspective on problems. A Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research report on trends in bail and sentencing outcomes in New South Wales criminal courts between 1993 and 2007 revealed that in local courts the proportion of defendants refused bail doubled during those years, from 3.6 per cent to 7.6 per cent. In the District and Supreme courts the proportion of defendants refused bail during that period also doubled, from 23.8 per cent to 47.6 per cent.
A Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research report on the use of unconditional bail before trial in New South Wales between the years 1999 and 2008 found that over the past decade there has been a marked reduction in the number and percentage of cases where bail is dispensed with, from 60.3 per cent in 1999 to 44.9 per cent in 2008; and that, while there has been some increase in the percentage, 3 per cent, and number of defendants refused bail, the main change has been a rise in the number of defendants placed on bail rather than released unconditionally.
Another trend has been the increase in the number of juveniles being held in custody pending a court
outcome—that is, being held on remand. Between 2007 and 2008 the juvenile remand population in New South Wales grew by 32 per cent, from an average of 181 per day to 239 per day. In 2009 there was a downward trend in the juvenile remand population, and this continued to the end of 2010. Remand numbers spiked in March 2011, to 261, and in July of 2011, to 241. On Saturday night 23 October 2011 there were 197 young people held on remand. The average number of juvenile remandees per day in 2010-11 was 193, and this is still higher than the daily number in 2007.
The juvenile remand rate continues to be characterised by significant fluctuations and remains at an unacceptably high level. Fifty to 60 per cent of young people in detention centres are held on remand; 90 per cent of admissions to detention centres are remand admissions; and approximately 82 per cent of young people remanded in custody do not receive custodial sentences. Pressure is being placed on the remand population by an increase in both the number of juveniles placed on remand and the average length of stay on remand.
Increases in the remand population are also occurring among adults. As at 16 October 2011, 2,671 people were in full-time custody on remand, awaiting trial or sentence. This is an increase of 86 per cent over 10 years since 30 June 2010, when only 1,433 people were in full-time custody on remand.
We have commenced the Bail Act review, and on 8 June I asked the Law Reform Commission to undertaken a review of bail law in New South Wales. I am concerned that the Bail Act may have moved away from the spirit and intent of the original legislation—as was reflected in the comments made by the Chief Magistrate, Graeme Henson, reported in the newspaper today. This was to ensure attendance at a hearing or trial, to stop defendants from committing further offences and to prevent interference with witnesses. In announcing the review I was also conscious of the number of people on remand, especially juveniles. I also have concerns about the complexity of bail law in New South Wales and I know these concerns are shared by members of the legal profession and the bench. Bail laws should be as clear and straightforward as possible.
The terms of reference for the review incorporate issues such as: the objects of the Bail Act; the factors to be considered and presumptions to be applied in bail determinations; the consequences of breaching bail; the desirability of maintaining section 22A of the Bail Act; and the application of bail laws to young people and Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders. The Law Reform Commission can also consider the bail laws of other jurisdictions and any additional bail-related matter. A retired Supreme Court judge, the Honourable Hal Sperling, QC, is leading the New South Wales Law Reform Commission project, with the assistance of its chair, former Justice James Wood, and is due to report next month.
I would like to make a few comments on the juvenile remand population. I am advised that the heads of justice agencies were asked to look into the issue of increases in the number of juveniles being held in remand, and to identify the causes of the increase. As part of this process, advice was sought from the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, which identified two major correlating factors: increased policing of bail conditions, which I think is due to the old State Plan, which we have ditched; and changes made to the Bail Act 1978 in 2007 to prevent the making of repeat bail applications in the same court. I might continue with more comments on that matter later, if that is the end of this period.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Juvenile Justice reviews
Liz Keen | ABC Mid North Coast | 8 November, 2011
Listen to interview with Anne Marr, Regional Director Northern Region of Juvenile Justice
The NSW Government is conducting a review of the laws governing juvenile offenders.
NSW Attorney General, Greg Smith has released a consultation paper looking at whether the laws are effective and consistent with the Government's commitment to cutting re-offending rates.
The Deputy Premier, Andrew Stoner, has organised an invitation only consultation with business members in Kempsey this Wednesday looking into Juvenile Justice locally.
Anne Marr is the Regional Director of the Northern Region of Juvenile Justice, Attorney General and Justice Department and she said the Kempsey meeting will sit alongside other community consultations to feed recommendations to the current reviews.
She says that while it is important that young offenders understand the impacts of the crime they have committed, it is also important the system looks at ways to stop the young person from reoffending.
"When you're locking up a 14 year old, you've got to do something to turn that young person around and make them a positive member of society."
Juvenile of Justice studies have shown that 60% of young offenders have a history of child abuse and trauma, 27% have been placed in care before the age of 16, 8% have a child of their own and 12% have a deceased parent; Ms Marr says that these issues need to be addressed.
A recent pilot project in Kempsey, The Kempsey Family Inclusion Project, had some success working alongside the family of a young person who has been found guilty of an offence and Anne Marr says that these sorts of projects could come out of the reviews.
"When we work at those different levels with a young person that's offending we have a much better chance of success than when we work with the young person just in isolation,"
The NSW Government is conducting a review of the laws governing juvenile offenders.
NSW Attorney General, Greg Smith has released a consultation paper looking at whether the laws are effective and consistent with the Government's commitment to cutting re-offending rates.
The Deputy Premier, Andrew Stoner, has organised an invitation only consultation with business members in Kempsey this Wednesday looking into Juvenile Justice locally.
Anne Marr is the Regional Director of the Northern Region of Juvenile Justice, Attorney General and Justice Department and she said the Kempsey meeting will sit alongside other community consultations to feed recommendations to the current reviews.
She says that while it is important that young offenders understand the impacts of the crime they have committed, it is also important the system looks at ways to stop the young person from reoffending.
"When you're locking up a 14 year old, you've got to do something to turn that young person around and make them a positive member of society."
Juvenile of Justice studies have shown that 60% of young offenders have a history of child abuse and trauma, 27% have been placed in care before the age of 16, 8% have a child of their own and 12% have a deceased parent; Ms Marr says that these issues need to be addressed.
A recent pilot project in Kempsey, The Kempsey Family Inclusion Project, had some success working alongside the family of a young person who has been found guilty of an offence and Anne Marr says that these sorts of projects could come out of the reviews.
"When we work at those different levels with a young person that's offending we have a much better chance of success than when we work with the young person just in isolation,"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)