Making Queensland Safer Act 2024
The Queensland Crisafulli Government’s latest legislation, the Making Queensland Safer Act 2024 (Act), substantially changes how children are treated by Queensland’s police, courts and prisons, including by making prison sentences significantly longer. The Queensland Government concedes that the changes are ‘more punitive than necessary to achieve community safety’ and ‘in direct conflict with international law standards’. ¹
This summary outlines the most detrimental changes. Unless otherwise stated, all references to legislation are references to Queensland legislation.
What are the key issues?
The Act has been strongly criticised by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations, the United Nations and legal, health and criminology experts because: ²
it will exacerbate disproportionate rates of imprisonment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and children with disabilities
it impacts children as young as ten
it creates a sentencing regime that treats children more harshly than adults³
it ignores evidence that non-custodial, community-based approaches lead to better outcomes for children and the community
it fails to recognise that children charged with offences are often victims
it overrides the Human Rights Act 2019 and is incompatible with international human rights
the government fast-tracked it through Parliament without the usual scrutiny
Queensland’s youth prisons are at capacity, with children already being held in adult watch houses for increasingly long periods of time
What does the Act change?
The Act’s most serious impacts on children are its changes to the Youth Justice Act 1992, Children’s Court Act 1992 and Criminal Code to:
apply adult penalties to children for a range of offences, including non-violent ones
remove the principle that detention should only be used as a last resort
require courts to make the impact of an offence on a victim their main consideration when sentencing children
remove restorative justice, a community-based process, as a sentencing option
subject children to longer probation periods
vastly expand what is captured on children’s criminal histories and allow this expanded history, and findings of guilt without conviction, to be used in adulthood
allow more people to watch Children’s Court proceedings and remove the Court’s ability to exclude people for safety reasons or to ensure the administration of justice
remove safeguards in the process for transferring children from youth prisons to adult prisons when they turn 18
These changes are explained in more detail below (see “what exactly are the changes?”).
The Act also changes the victim information register⁴ from an opt-in to an opt-out model. More information on this change can be found in the Act’s explanatory notes.⁵
When do the changes start?
The changes, except those relating to criminal histories, findings of guilt and the victim information register, started on 13 December 2024. The government has not yet confirmed a start date for these other changes.
Some of the changes apply to events that occurred before the date of the change.
What are the main impacts of the Act?
The Act is expected to:
send more children to prison, because detention is no longer a last resort, because expanded criminal histories will be used in arrest, bail and sentencing decisions, because the community-based sentencing option of restorative justice has been taken away and because longer probation orders mean there is more time for children to break rules of their order
put children in prison for longer, because children face long adult penalties, because expanded criminal histories will be used in sentencing decisions, because the impact on an offence of a victim is to be prioritised above all other sentencing considerations and because children may not be able to disclose factors relevant to receiving a shorter sentence if judges cannot close courtrooms
lead to more children being detained in inhuman conditions in adult watch houses while waiting for cells in youth prisons, because of already overflowing youth prisons
put more young adults in detention, because their expanded childhood criminal histories, including non-custodial events and findings of guilt without conviction, will be able to be used against them when they become adults
result in newly 18-year-olds losing support services and chances of successful reintegration into the community, because procedural fairness, appeal rights and consideration of vulnerability have been removed from the process of transitioning children from youth to adult prisons when they turn 18
These significant impacts on children affect the whole community:⁶
sending children to watch houses and prison harms them – their basic needs are not met, they are subjected to inhuman practices and they die preventable deaths.
sending children to prison is criminogenic – when a child goes to prison it makes it more likely that they will engage with the criminal legal system for the rest of their lives.
families and communities that children are removed from experience trauma – prison perpetuates the root causes of offending over generations.
The impacts of a child going to prison will be mostly felt by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families and communities, because the Act will disproportionately impact Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, including children with disabilities.
Why will the Act disproportionately impact Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and children with disabilities?
Most children in custody in Queensland are Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and most have complex health issues or disabilities.
Over 70% of children in detention, and over 80% of 10–13 year olds in detention, are Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander.⁷ This is not because Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children commit more crimes. It is because of systemic injustices such as discriminatory policing and limited access to support services. The Act will compound these injustices.
Over 80% of children in detention have experience with substance use and 44% have at least one disability.⁸ It is unmet health and social needs that have led to them being incarcerated.
How is the Act incompatible with human rights?
Adult penalties and detention as a last resort
The Queensland Government admits that applying adult penalties to children and removing detention as a last resort creates ‘clear and deep’ limitations on human rights and that the ‘negative impact on the rights of children likely outweighs the legitimate aim of making children more accountable for their crime’.⁹ It also admits that the changes are incompatible with human rights such as:
protection from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (section 17)
humane treatment when deprived of liberty (section 30)
protection of families and children (section 26)
recognition and equality before the law (section 15)
Instead of considering how it could ensure human rights compatible law reform, the government has overridden the Human Rights Act for five years.¹⁰ The Human Rights Act can only be overridden in exceptional circumstances and the Queensland Human Rights Commission advises there is no justification for the override.¹¹
In addition to overriding domestic human rights law, the government has conceded that the changes regarding adult penalties and detention as a last resort are ‘in direct conflict with international standards’.¹² Examples of requirements under United Nations Conventions and Rules that these changes contravene include:
the best interests and wellbeing of a child should come first¹³
detention should only be used as a last resort and for the shortest appropriate time¹⁴
a child should be treated in manner that accounts for their age and the desirability of promoting their reintegration into society¹⁵
detention should not be used unless a child is found guilty of a serious act of violence against a person or persistent serious offences and if there is no other appropriate response¹⁶
penalties should be proportional to the circumstances¹⁷
Other changes and issues
The government acknowledges that other changes in the Act also limit human rights but it considers these other limitations justifiable. This conclusion is arguably flawed.¹⁸
In addition, the government has not identified all human rights under the Human Rights Act that are relevant to each change. For example, the government did not comment on the right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to maintain kinship ties (section 28(2)(b)). It also did not consider that rights relating to equality and discrimination (for example, section 15) were relevant despite the Act’s clear impacts on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children.
How was the legislation fast-tracked through Parliament?
The Constitution of Queensland 2001 requires Bills that are introduced into Parliament to be referred to a Parliamentary Committee for an inquiry for at least six weeks before the Bill is debated, and only allows Bills to be fast-tracked if Parliament declares them urgent. The government declared that the Bill was urgent on the basis that it had promised to deliver its ‘adult crime, adult time’ election commitment before Christmas. The Opposition, while flagging concerns, supported the declaration.
As a result, the Bill was referred to the Justice, Integrity and Community Safety Committee for eight days. Stakeholders had three business days from when the Bill was introduced to write submissions, and the Committee tabled its report three days after submissions closed. The statement of reservation and dissenting from non-government committee members,¹⁹ and stakeholder submissions,²⁰ outline significant concerns about these timeframes and the potential consequences of rushed legislation.
In addition, during debate of the Bill, the government made 12 amendments to further expand what is included in criminal history information and make numerous clarifications and corrections.²¹ It gave members of Parliament approximately 20 minutes’ notice of the amendments and the amendments were not published until they, and the Bill, were passed.
What exactly are the changes?
Adult penalties for children
The Act increased the minimum, mandatory and maximum sentences for 13 offences:
murder
manslaughter
acts intended to cause grievous bodily harm and other malicious acts
unlawful striking causing death
grievous bodily harm
wounding
serious assault
robbery
burglary
entering or being in premises and committing indictable offences
dangerous operation of a vehicle
unlawful use or possession of motor vehicles, aircraft or vessels
unlawful entry of vehicle for committing indicatable offences
The maximum sentence for these offences has been at least doubled, several offences involve potential life detention and murder requires life detention. A more detailed summary of the increases, provided by the government, is available here.
Some of the offences can apply to non-violent offending and a wide spectrum of seriousness. They also apply if a child is a party to an offence. For example, a child who is in a car while another child is driving at non-dangerous speeds could be subjected to adult penalties. A child who is a ‘look out’ for a non-violent crime that escalates and results in a reckless death, could potentially be found guilty of murder and sentenced to life in prison.
Detention no longer a last resort
Detention as a last resort is a foundational principle of international law. It means that options other than detention, such as community-based options, should be considered first. It exists because prison is known to harm rather than rehabilitate children.
Before the Act, for arrest, bail and sentencing decisions, it was a consideration that ‘a child should be detained in custody where other non-custodial measures of prevention and intervention would not be sufficient’.²² The Act changed the Youth Justice Act to remove all references to the consideration. Courts are now also prohibited from considering detention as a last resort during sentencing.²³
As a result, detention as a last resort now applies to adults but not children.²⁴
Removal of restorative justice orders as a sentencing option
Restorative justice is an evidence-based process that can repair harm for victims and provide accountability for actions without putting children behind bars.²⁵ It acknowledges that justice means different things to different people. It also helps to reduce the overrepresentation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in the criminal legal system.
Before the Act, during sentencing, courts could order children to participate in a restorative justice process. The Act changed the Youth Justice Act to remove restorative justice as a sentencing option for the 13 offences listed above.²⁶ Referrals for restorative justice processes can still be made before sentencing, but restorative justice orders cannot be a sentence.
This means that a well-established alternative to sending children to prison has been completely removed from the sentencing options available to judges.
Impact on victims now primary consideration
Before the Act, sentencing principles for children were not in any order of importance. The Act changed the Youth Justice Act so that when sentencing a child, the court’s primary consideration must be the impact of a victim, including any harm mentioned in information the victim has provided in a victim statement.²⁷
There is no change to adult sentencing principles, which have no hierarchy. ²⁸Children may therefore be given harsher sentences than adults for the same offence.
There may also be inconsistent sentencing between children’s cases. This is because it is not compulsory for victims to provide statements, and victims engage with court proceedings and statements in different ways and to different extents.
Longer probation periods
Probation orders allow children to serve their sentence in the community, while complying with conditions such as not committing any offence, reporting to a probation office when directed and participating in programs and counselling. Conditions of probation orders can be numerous and onerous, and there is discretion in how probation officers deal with breaches. Breaches can end up before the courts and result in prison sentences.
Before the Act, probation orders were capped at one or two years for most matters, and three years for ‘serious offences’.²⁹ The Act lifted the cap to three years for all of the 13 offences lifted above.³⁰
This means that children can be closely monitored for compliance with probation order conditions for an extra year, which increases the risk of them going to prison for breach of a probation order.
Expanded content and use of criminal histories
There are currently some limits to what is contained in a child’s criminal history. The Act will expand criminal histories to include police cautions, restorative justice agreements, failures to comply with restorative justice agreements, how failures to comply are dealt with and all decisions, findings, orders and action taken relating to variations of community-based orders, contraventions of community-based orders and contraventions of supervised release orders.³¹
These expanded criminal histories will be able to be used in arrest, bail and sentencing decisions for children. The Act will also expand sentencing considerations for children to include their traffic history, including fines and demerit points.³²
In addition, the expanded childhood criminal histories can be used in adulthood. The Act will enable events from a child’s expanded criminal history to be used in adult sentencing for up to five years from the latest activity on the history.³³
The Act also changes how findings of guilt without a conviction are dealt with. Before the Act, findings of guilt when a person was a child could not be used in evidence when the person became an adult if a conviction was not recorded. The Act will allow findings of guilt without a conviction from childhood to be considered in adult sentencing, and will generally require non-convictions to taken as convictions, for five years from the latest activity on the childhood criminal history.³⁴ Non-convictions for dangerous driving offences as a child will also become relevant to whether there are aggravating circumstances in sentencing for dangerous driving offences as an adult.³⁵
The clear purpose of the changes is to facilitate harsher sentences.
Removal of exclusion orders in Children’s Court proceedings
Before the Act, only certain people could attend Children’s Court proceedings and the judge could make an order excluding them from the courtroom in relation to risks to safety or the administration of justice. The Act removed this power to exclude persons and allows additional relatives to attend.³⁶
This means more people can attend court, and people – including media – cannot be excluded from proceedings for safety or justice reasons. While the court has some limited powers to exclude people for other reasons, this change means that in some cases it will be difficult or impossible to close the court even when there is sensitive content.
This may impact a child’s engagement with proceedings. It could also encourage public naming and shaming and vigilante behaviour.
Stricter transfers from youth prisons to adult prisons
Before the Act, there was a process for transferring children who turn 18 in youth prisons to adult prisons. This required government to provide notice of the transfer and facilitate a meeting with a lawyer. The process accounted for considerations such as the young person’s vulnerability, rehabilitation programs they had access to and availability of those programs if they were transferred. Transfers could be delayed until the young person turned 18 years and 6 months. Decisions could also be reviewed by the Children’s Court.
The Act makes transferring young adults from youth prisons to adult prisons within a month of turning 18 the default. It removes the above considerations and provides that procedural fairness is not required. It also removes the ability to apply to the Children’s Court for review.
This may have detrimental impacts for vulnerable young people as well as community safety.³⁷
This explainer is not legal advice
Note that this is a guide to provide general information only. It is not intended to be legal advice — seek legal advice if necessary.
References and footnotes
Human rights statement for the laws as introduced into Parliament, page 5
Committee website, submissions tab; statement from Chair of UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 30 November 2024
See headings detention no longer a last resort and impact on victims now primary consideration
https://www.qld.gov.au/law/your-rights/victim-rights-and-complaints/victims-registers/youth
Explanatory notes for the laws as introduced into Parliament, pages 2, 8.
Find out more in our submission on the laws, made jointly with Change the Record, here
Productivity Commission Report on Government Services 2024, table 17A.9
Queensland Youth Justice Strategy 2024-2028, page 11, noting that complex health issues and disability may be underreported
Human rights statement for the laws as introduced into Parliament, page 6
Queensland Human Rights Commission submission on the laws, page 22
Human rights statement for the laws as introduced into Parliament, page 5
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), article 3.1; UN Minimum Rules for Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules), rules 1.1, 17.1(d)
CRC, article 37(b); Beijing Rules, rules 17.1(b), 18.2
CRC, article 40(1)
Beijing Rules, rule 17.1(c)
Beijing Rules, rule 5
Change the Record and Human Rights Law Centre joint submission on the laws, page 10
Justice, Integrity and Community Safety Committee report, pages 71-87
Committee website, submissions tab
Amendments moved during consideration in detail; explanatory notes for the amendments
Until August 2024, the Youth Justice Act used the exact words “only as a last resort”, however in the last term of Government the Labor party softened the wording of the principle: Queensland Community Safety Act 2024, section 132
Youth Justice Act, section 150(1)
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992, section 9(2)
Youth Justice Act, section 175A(8)
Youth Justice Act, section 150(2)
Penalties and Sentences Act, section 9
Defined by how long adults could be imprisoned for the offence
Youth Justice Act, section 175A(2)(a)
Act, section 39 (not yet commenced)
Act, section 52(2) (not yet commenced)
Act, section 48 – new section 149AA of the Youth Justice Act (not yet commenced)
See above
Act, section 48 – new section 149AB of the Youth Justice Act (not yet commenced)
Children’s Court Act, section 20
Prisoners’ Legal Service submission on the laws