1. Kelvin Doherty Assistant Director Youth Justice Agency Children England Annual Conference 27/2/2013

2. Journey so far 1990’s – Quaker organised meetings 1998 – Good Friday Agreement & Review of Justice 2002 – Justice Act 2003 - 2006 Pilot project 2006 – Queens University of Belfast evaluation 2008 – Republic of Ireland RJ Commission recommends a YC model 2008 – Criminal Justice Inspectorate 2009 – Prison Reform Trust report 2010 – Independent Youth Crime Commission for England & Wales report November 2010 – England & Wales Green paper 2011/12 – Centre for Social Justice report

3. A Youth Conference is Restorative Safe, facilitated meeting Participative Enables the young person to make amends Enables the victim to seek redress Addresses the young person’s offending Youth conference focuses on: Reparative justice and meeting the needs of victims Rehabilitative justice Proportionality rather than retributive justice Devolving power to the conference participants

4. Eligibility & Suitability Willing & Able All offences bar those carrying mandatory sentence or offences under Terrorism Act Serve no useful purpose

5. A Youth Conference gives young offenders the opportunity to understand and make amends to their victims for the effects of their offences and to take steps to stop offending. It involves families,victims,community and the young person in making a decision on what can be done to put right the harm caused. Community Young person Victim Youth Conference Service

6. LEGISLATION JUSTICE {NI}ACT 2002 COURTPPS YCS co-ordinator, young person, Appropriate adult, police officer, lawyer, victim, victim supporter, appropriate others To date: approximately 15000 referrals for all areas On completion of a Conference a young person will be subject to a Youth Conference Plan (PPS) or a Youth Conference Order (Court).

7. Conference Process: Legislative Powers The young person may be required to: Apologise Make reparation to the victim, any person affected, or to the community Make a payment to the victim not exceeding cost of replacing or repairing any damage Submit to the supervision of an adult Perform unpaid work or service in or for the community Participate in activities to address her/his offending Submit to restrictions on conduct or whereabouts Submit to treatment for a mental condition or for alcohol/drugs dependency

8. Referrals Court 55% PPS 45% Male 85% Female 15% 95% of referrals reach full conference 10% of plans amended in court by District Judge

9. Referrals by Offence type Burglary 6% Criminal Damage 19% Drug Offences 3% Fraud 0.5% Motoring 14% ** Offences against the state 14% Other 1% Robbery 0.5% Sexual Offences 1% Theft 16% Violence Against the Person 24%

10. What makes a good conference Robust Preparation Skilled and well trained facilitators Safety for all parties Range of options to engage victims Facilitation not mediation/interpretative listening Those affected by the crime are the owners of whether there is remorse from a young person Enabling of storytelling Reparation is restorative No condemnation of young person by participants

11. 50% attendance by direct victims 78% of plans are reparative 84% of young people made an apology 97% of young people were satisfied with the process 90% of victims satisfied with the outcome of the conference but 28% thought offence to conference was too long Findings from Practice

12. Content of plans Activities 81% Apology 51% Service to the community 21% Education 1.5% Restitution 17% Reparation 47% Restriction 19% Supervision 4% Treatment 1.5%

13. Reoffending 2005, 2006, 2007 & 2008 cohorts Offending base rate in 2006 for community sentences 52.1%. Youth Conference 38.4% Court = 47.4% Diversionary = 28.3% Other sentences (Probation Order 58.6%, CRO 50%)

14. Cont… 2007 offending base rate for community sentences 44.1%. Youth conference 38.3% 2008 offending base rate for community sentences 53.5%. Youth conference 45.4% Reoffending rate for violent offences 2006 22% Lower rates of reoffending when a victim is present in 2006 court ordered sample (12.6% differential)

15. Challenges Justice expert tensions Outcomes must be proportionate to the offence Involves devolved decision making to those effected by the crime Repeat ‘offenders’ find it difficult compared to traditional model The conference reaches a consensus on the Action plan content Inter professional tensions Maintaining Integrity of RJ model

16. What do Young People think about their contact with the YJA? 93% agree that the YJA supported them to desist from offending. 94% agree that their contact with the YJA helped them understand the harm they caused.