My matter, for the Attorney-General, is about the recent commencement of an 18-month trial to expand the Court Integrated Services Program (or CISP).

So far, there has been some varying reaction about this pilot.

As part of that, some sections of the community are certainly concerned about the prospect (through this trial) of more criminals accessing bail or avoiding custody, and the significant risks associated with that.

They have a not-unreasonable expectation that the Government and court officials simply must maintain a very vigilant eye on how this trial is working in practice – especially given that, so often, the perpetrators of serious crimes in Victoria are on bail or some other form of early release at the time.

I know the Attorney would be well aware (and I hope very mindful and respectful) of these sentiments.

In fairness to the Government, I do also want to acknowledge that the decision to proceed with this trial should not be seen as new or unexpected.  In fact, the impetus for it is actually Recommendation 27 of the Coghlan Bail Review from back in 2017, and funding to pursue it was also announced back in the 2019-20 Budget.

I do want to dwell on one particular element of Recommendation 27,
though – namely, 27 (d) – about which I still find it difficult to access much information on the public record.

That part of the recommendation talks about the need for the Government to fund a longitudinal study on the effectiveness of the CISP.

In various public statements about the new pilot, there have been references to a three-year University of Melbourne study.  It’s not clear that these refer to anything recent, though; indeed, the only such study that seems to be easily attainable publicly is one completed way back in 2010.

Separately, a tender process for a new study did seem to be initiated last year.  However, that was apparently only for a future evaluation of the new pilot.

Accordingly, for many people (including me), there remain various questions about all of this.

The action I therefore seek from the Attorney is an outline of how the Government has specifically responded to, and implemented, Recommendation 27 (d) of the Coghlan Bail Review.

As part of that answer, I would hope that she might be able to touch on the current strengths, weaknesses and risks of the CISP from the Government’s perspective – and how many more people are now likely to become participants in the program through the new 18-month trial.