Statutes Amendment (Domestic Violence) Bill

Third Reading

Adjourned debate on third reading (resumed on motion).

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General) (15:58): Just before the luncheon adjournment, I was espousing the virtues of the new Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme and, in particular, commending Mr Chris Boundy of the Legal Services Commission. He is part of the helpful education process of the new scheme and addressed a number of issues and answered questions on radio recently.

All the agencies that work in this area have a responsibility—that is, the support agencies—to assist women and children principally, but of course some men who are vulnerable in circumstances, and victims of domestic violence; their extended family who are called upon frequently to provide support; a number of the agencies that we are very proud as a new government to provide support to; the South Australian police officers, either at the front line or in investigative roles, in the investigation and prosecution of domestic violence circumstances; and members of our courts, the Legal Services Commission and indeed members of my own department, who are frequently called upon to provide advice in these matters.

It is not a pretty area; it is very ugly. It means that all of us as members of the community have a responsibility—a duty, I suggest—to ensure that we do everything we can to support people in this situation, whether it is a member of our family, a neighbour, a friend, someone we know about, or maybe a colleague in the workplace. Even more importantly, if there is evidence of the dynamics of domestic violence being present in the home of our friends, colleagues or family members, then we all have a responsibility to speak up to them, to support those who are under pressure or duress. Of course, if we are a really good friend, we have a responsibility to speak to those we think are perpetrating that on other members of their household.

I am very pleased to have had the opposition's support on this bill. There has been unanimous contribution to the debate in this house. I certainly hope that those in other place will see this exactly the same way. I look forward to receiving advice of their consideration in due course.

Mr ODENWALDER (Elizabeth) (16:01): I did not get a chance to make a contribution during the second reading, so I thought I would just make a very brief one now. Obviously I support the bill. As the Attorney said, this bill contains some very important matters, matters that have been canvassed largely for several years now, as the Attorney pointed out. There was a whole process that those on this side went through in terms of a discussion paper and a community consultation around domestic violence. The Attorney has been critical of the time that took. Perhaps she is right, perhaps not. But I am particularly pleased that six months into her government they have brought this bill to the house. It largely reflects all those things we have been talking about for the last few years.

Importantly, though, there is the element of strangulation, which, as far as I am aware, was not canvassed in the discussion paper last year, but I could be wrong. It is a very important element. It is very interesting and it brought to light an area of which I was not previously that aware; that is, strangulation is one of the more prominent indicators of future abuse at a more serious level or even of death later on of a victim of domestic violence.

I think this is a really important measure. I am really happy that the government has introduced this legislation, and I am really happy to support it here today. Importantly, if I understand it right, it does not require the victim to have any injury. Perhaps even more importantly, it does not require the element of intent from the perpetrator. It is enough to have simply performed the act. That is a very important step in proving this offence and laying the groundwork for intervention orders, for other charges, for entries on the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme, for instance. I want to congratulate the Attorney and the government on introducing this legislation and I am happy that we on this side are supporting it.

Since the Attorney did bring it up in her closing statements, I want to say a few things about the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme. Members who have been here for a while will know that I brought this idea to government several years ago. It was announced on White Ribbon Day 2016, I think, that we would be looking into that measure as part of a broader discussion. Perhaps it did take a little long. We were prepared, if we won the election, to implement a scheme very similar to the Attorney's, as far as I am aware, which is no criticism of the Attorney. I am not here to criticise anybody, Attorney. I think it is a very is good scheme. I think the scheme they have arrived at is a very good scheme.

I want to echo the sentiments of the member for Elder—who, I appreciate, has also been involved in this process—that an important part of the scheme (which I will not go over again now as I have gone over it several times in this place) is whether or not the fears of the prospective victim are founded in relation to a particular potential perpetrator and whether this then triggers a process of agencies around that potential victim. That is, the simple act of applying for a domestic violence disclosure triggers a whole lot of processes around that potential victim, whether or not the person she is inquiring about has any particular red flags.

I think that is a really important measure and I congratulate the Attorney on it and on the bill that is before us today. I will not hold up the house any longer. I think it is an important bill, and I hope it has a speedy passage through the house. I commend it.

Bill read a third time and passed.