Department of Premier & CabinetPresentation to Policy Advisers

Key Policy Issues facing Victoria

SD/CJ Relationship

Their Inter-relationship and Impact on

Public Health and Well-being

CRIMINALJUSTICE

SOCIALDISADVANTAGE

CAR report

Positive impact of social cohesion

Strong correlations between disadvantage factors

Poverty concentrated and entrenched in certain areas

Measures social disadvantage by postcode area in Vic and New South Wales

Social Disadvantage

CAR Disadvantage Factors

Social Disadvantage Factors

Low Birth Weight

Low Work Skills

Court ConvictionsYear 12 Incomplete

MortalityEarly School Leaving

Disability/Sickness AllowanceLow Family Income

Psychiatric Hosp. AdmissionsLong Term Unemployment

Child NeglectUnemployment

Imprisonment

Source: Vinson, T., Community, Adversity & Resilience, Jesuit Social Services, Melbourne, 2004, p. 46

CAR Map Vic

Social Comparison – Vic

Unequal in Life

Source: Vinson, T., Community, Adversity & Resilience, Jesuit Social Services, Melbourne, 2004, [Map 4]

DisadvantageDegree of DisadvantageMiddle rangeDegree of AdvantageAdvantageAll others

CAR Map Melb

Social Comparison – Melbourne

Source: Vinson, T., Community, Adversity & Resilience, Jesuit Social Services, Melbourne, 2004, [Map 5]

Unequal in Life

DisadvantageDegree of DisadvantageMiddle rangeDegree of AdvantageAdvantageAll others

CAR Spac Comp Vic 1

Spatial Compression of DisadvantagePercentage of Victorian Postcode areas needed to account for 25% and 50% of instances of each form of disadvantage

TO REACH

25%

TO REACH50%

Imprisonment 2.1 7.3

Child NeglectLong Term Unemployment

2.72.9

8.3 8.9

Psychiatric Hospital Admissions

3.5 10.6

Disability/Sickness Allowance

3.6 11.2

Court Convictions 3.9 11.1

Source: Vinson, T., Community, Adversity & Resilience, Jesuit Social Services, Melbourne, 2004, p. 48N = 647

CAR Spac Comp Vic 2

Spatial Compression of Disadvantage (cont’d)

TO REACH25%

TO REACH50%

Low Birth Weight 3.9 11.6

Year 12 Incomplete 3.9 11.8

Unemployment 4.1 11.3

Low Work Skills 4.2 11.6

Early School Leaving 4.4 12.4

Low Family Income 4.5 12.9

Mortality 4.8 13.3

Source: Vinson, T., Community, Adversity & Resilience, Jesuit Social Services, Melbourne, 2004, p. 48N = 647

CAR Social Cohesion Factors

Social Cohesion Factors

Source: Vinson, T., Community, Adversity & Resilience, Jesuit Social Services, Melbourne, 2004, p. 46

Availability of informal help

Volunteering

Participation in organised recreation/sports groups

CAR Low Inc/Imp SC comp

Community Development Interventions Drives a Wedge in the Cycle of

Disadvantage

Across local populations

LOW FAMILY

INCOME

and

IMPRISONMENT

are strongly connected

(0.55**)

Connectiongrows

stronger(0.62)

Low social

cohesionwith

Connectionsignificantly

weakens(0.18)

withHigh social

cohesion

N = 277

**Significant at .01 levelSource: Vinson, T., Community, Adversity & Resilience, Jesuit Social Services, Melbourne, 2004, p. 79

CAR Unemp/Imp SC comp

Across local populations

UNEMPLOYMENT

and

IMPRISONMENT

are strongly connected

(0.65**)

Connectiongrows

stronger(0.75)

Low social

cohesionwith

Connectionsignificantly

weakens(0.22)

withHigh social

cohesion

N = 277

Impact of Community Development Interventions (contd)

Source: Vinson, T., Community, Adversity & Resilience, Jesuit Social Services, Melbourne, 2004, p. 79

**Significant at .01 level

CAR Early Sch/Unemp SC comp

Across local populations

EARLY SCHOOL

LEAVING

and

UNEMPLOYMENT

are strongly connected

(0.64**)

Connectionremains strong(0.63)

Low social

cohesionwith

Connectionsignificantly

weakens(0.28)

withHigh social

cohesion

N = 277

Impact of Community Development Interventions (contd)

Source: Vinson, T., Community, Adversity & Resilience, Jesuit Social Services, Melbourne, 2004, p. 79

**Significant at .01 level

CAR Unemp/Child Neglect SC comp

Across local populations

UNEMPLOYMENT

and

CHILD NEGLECT

are strongly connected

(0.68**)

Connectionremains

high(0.56)

Low social

cohesionwith

Connection drops(0.40)

withHigh social

cohesion

N = 277

Impact of Community Development Interventions (contd)

Source: Vinson, T., Community, Adversity & Resilience, Jesuit Social Services, Melbourne, 2004, p. 79

**Significant at .01 level

Criminal Justice Main Points

Impact on general public

Health of prisoners

Custodial remand

Imbalance between crime and prison rates

Criminal Justice

Chart, crime/prison rates

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

All prisoners

Sentencedprisoners

Unsentencedprisoners

Prisoners Australia 1994 - 2004

Crime rates in Australia per 100,000 population. 1996- 2003

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Violent crime rate

Property crime rate

Crime Rate Australia 1996-2003

per 100,000 population

Crime rate

down

but

Prison rate up

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics (2004), Prisoners in Australia, ABS, Cat No 4517.0, Table 16, p. 31.

Source: Crime Statistics. Australian Institute of Criminology. Australian crime. Facts and figures 2004

Chart, increase in Remand Pop - Vic

Increase in Remand Population

- VicVictorian prison population, cumulative percentage change per 100,000 adults: 1994-2004

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Total prisonpopulation

Totalsentencedpopulation

Total remandpopulation

Source: ABS, Community, Prisoners in Australia : 4517.0, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, 2004, pp. 56-7

Remand Factors

Other:- Lack of stable accommodation and income

Institutional Factors:- increased time on remand

Crime:- common offences committed by remand population

Factors contributing to increase in unsentenced prison population

Impact of Remand

Disruption from social support networks and commitments to family

Increased likelihood of guilty plea, or longer sentence

Likelihood of assault

Impact of Custodial Remand

Deprivation of civil liberties due to remand in maximum security prisons

Increased risk to health and general wellbeing

Financial Cost of Remand

Financial Costs of Custodial Remand

$214 million spent on Victorian prisons (2003-4)

Average cost per prisoner per day = $204.10

Source: Productivity Commission, Report on Government Services 2003-2005 : Corrective Services 2003-2005

High Rates of Mental Illness

High Rates of Prisoners with Mental Illness

Source: Victorian Prisoner Health Studies, DOJ, Feb 2003, p.30 & 36.

26% of prisoners met criteria for mental illness

20% met criteria for Major Depression

8% met criteria for Manic Depression (Bipolar)

7% met criteria for Schizophrenia

30% of prisoners surveyed had attempted suicide

High Rates of Hec C

High Rates of Prisoners with Hepatitis C

58% of prisoners tested positive for Hep C Virus

69% of prisoners admit to injecting drugs

18.5% increase in prisoners found to be HCV carriers

Source: Victorian Prisoner Health Studies, DOJ, Feb 2003, p. 90

Impact on Public

Impact on General Public

Increased expenditure on prison construction and operation

Increased risk of Hepatitis C Infection- over 220,000 Australians already infected- 16,000 new infections each year

Decreased expenditure on health and education and early intervention programs