Bills

Child Sex Offenders Registration (Public Register) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence, Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing) (15:41): I will briefly continue my remarks that I made in relation to both the importance of this bill and also the importance of the policies, the programs and the investment that complement this crucial work that is happening through this legislation to ensure that we are dealing with vile child sex abusers. As I said, we need to deal with those predators. We also need to make sure that we have the programs, policies and investments in place that support children to help keep them safe and well and enabled to thrive.

I have gone through a number of those investments and programs, and there are others that I can mention. There is one more in quite a long list and that is that I am very proud that our government has invested $3.2 million into the establishment of Wakwakurna Kanyini, the Aboriginal peak body for Aboriginal children and young people. I am very proud of that investment.

That is absolutely an investment that is about ensuring that there is a structured voice through Wakwakurna Kanyini to make sure that Aboriginal children and young people are heard and supported on all issues that are important in their lives and that they are enabled to be connected to culture, country, community and kin with deep recognition that being so is both a right and also a protective factor. In terms of that, away from the legislation, that other suite of policies that we have, an investment to really make a difference with and for children and young people, I did want to mention that.

As I have outlined both before the lunch break and very briefly now, through the actions of our government it is really clear that we will do what we can within our power, everything within our power, to protect our community from vile child sex offenders.

Before I wrap up, I just want to say thank you to the Attorney-General for his work in this space and also for those in his office, Claire Morgan and Elliette Kirkbride, for their work towards this really important bill. I thank parliamentary counsel and everybody who has worked to get us to this important point today. I thank those in the upper house who spoke and I look forward to the contributions this afternoon from colleagues in this house. I commend the bill to the house and I seek leave to insert the explanation of clauses into Hansard without my reading it.

Leave granted.

Explanation of Clauses

Part 1—Preliminary

1—Short title

2—Commencement

These clauses are formal.

Part 2—Amendment of Child Sex Offenders Registration Act 2006

3—Amendment of section 4—Interpretation

The definition of foreign registrable offence is amended such that any offence, committed against a child, which is specified in a corresponding law as an offence which results in the offender being required to report information about themself in the jurisdiction in which the corresponding law is in force will fall within its meaning. By removing the requirement that foreign registrable offences not be registrable offences under the Act, offenders who commit offences in foreign jurisdictions which have analogous offences in the State will now be considered foreign registrable offenders under the Act, rather than simply registrable offenders.

4—Amendment of section 7—Who is a foreign registrable offender?

In order for a person to be considered a foreign registrable offender under section 7 currently, a person has to have been sentenced in a foreign jurisdiction for a foreign registrable offence of a prescribed class, and would, if they were in that foreign jurisdiction, be subject to reporting requirements. This clause amends section 7 to remove the requirement that the foreign registrable offence be of a prescribed class, such that any person who has been sentenced in a foreign jurisdiction for any foreign registrable offence, and who would be subject to a reporting requirement in that jurisdiction were they to be presently in it, is considered a foreign registrable offender.

5—Insertion of sections 66EA to 66ED

New sections 66EA to 66ED are inserted.

66EA—Delegation by Commissioner

Provision is made limiting the power of the Commissioner to delegate certain functions or powers under the Act.

66EB—Commissioner not required to publish or provide information

Provision is made clarifying that nothing in the Part requires the Commissioner to publish or provide information about registrable offenders or any other person.

66EC—Restriction on publication or provision of information about protected witnesses

Provision is made such that the Commissioner is not required or authorised to publish or provide information about protected witnesses.

66ED—Restriction on publication or provision of information about children in care

Provision is made such that the Commissioner is not required to publish information that would identify certain children or young people.

6—Insertion of sections 66FA and 66FB

New sections 66FA and FB are inserted.

66FA—Commissioner may provide person with image of certain registrable offenders

Provision is made for the Commissioner to have the power to, on application by a person, provide the person with images of certain registrable offenders who live in the same general locality as the person, and in relation to the exercise of the power.

66FB—Commissioner may inform child's parent or guardian whether specified person is a registrable offender

Provision is made for the Commissioner to have the power to, on application by a person, inform the person whether a specified person, who has regular unsupervised contact with a child, is a registrable offender, and in relation to the exercise of the power.

7—Amendment of section 66I—Conduct intended to incite animosity towards or harassment of identified offenders and other people

This clause amends the definition of identified offender in section 66I to include persons who have been identified by the Commissioner under sections 66FA or 66FB.

8—Amendment of section 66J—Publication, display and distribution of identifying information

This clause amends section 66J to extend the definition of identifying information for the purposes of the section such that it includes information published or provided by the Commissioner under the new sections 66FA or 66FB.

9—Amendment of section 66M—Power to enter and search premises

This clause amends section 66M to give police officers power to stop and search serious registrable offenders in addition to their premises. The section heading is amended to reflect this addition.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (15:45): I rise to indicate the opposition's support for the bill and I indicate I am the lead speaker. I will make a few brief remarks. I will not rehearse those contributions of the minister so far as they pertain to the bill. The bill, in fact, deals with three subject areas broadly and, dealt within the order in which they appear in the bill, firstly there is the question of correcting or rendering workable the notion, the working definitions of 'foreign registrable offence' and 'foreign registrable offender'. Those are the subjects of clauses 3 and 4. It just might be noted that where we are talking about foreign offenders and foreign offences, we are in the main referring there to offences committed interstate.

As far as I am aware, while they might conceivably apply to offences committed overseas, the fact is it is highly unlikely that such a foreign offender in that sense would be in South Australia in the first place, but there is an issue about movement between states. As the government has indicated, there is a consistency elsewhere in jurisdictions about this notion that the reporting requirements that apply in the home jurisdiction, that is, where the offences occurred, is the universal approach elsewhere. Similarly, this tie-up to class 1 and class 2 offences expressed in the act as it stands has both no real work to do and, to the extent that it is referring to prescribed offences, it is in fact incomplete and there is a missing link in the reference back anyway.

So the effect of these changes as they apply to those out-of-jurisdiction offences and offenders is therefore to treat those registrable offenders, first of all, not seek to line up their offences with equivalent class 1 and class 2 offences here, but rather refer back to the offence in the home jurisdiction and have reporting requirements apply as per that home jurisdiction. It is rather tortured drafting in the first place and the fixing-up has taken me a bit of time to get my head around so I hope that summation is of some use to the record.

As the minister pointed out, the second aspect of the bill, really the bit that responds to the election commitment and that relates to the extension of registration and reporting requirements, is this adoption of the Western Australian model of the three-tier approach to the capacity for individuals to seek out the services, particularly of police, to conduct searches and to provide information in those three categories that the minister has outlined again in this place. Those are advances that the opposition supports. They have been well elucidated both in the course of the debate in another place in August and again on the record here today.

The third aspect of the bill is relating to search, particularly what is the more modern phenomenon now of the need for police to have the power to search not only devices located at a place of a search or residence but also devices on a person away from a residence.

There are broadly three aspects: firstly, dealing with foreign registrable offences and registrable offenders; secondly, applying the three-tier model that has come from Western Australia, a jurisdiction that adopted this model some five or so years ago, as I understand; and thirdly, the extension for relevant and practical purposes of the capacity both to enter into and break open and search premises and also to stop and search a registrable offender away from premises, including the searching of particularly electronic devices that might be in the possession of such a registrable offender. That is the subject of clause 9 of this relatively short bill.

By taking these steps, obviously it goes without saying that all of us very much hope and expect the bill will enhance both the protection of children in this state and the capacity for crime prevention bodies—particularly those law enforcement officers, the police—to do their work in ensuring community safety more broadly. With that contribution, I commend the bill to the house.

Ms THOMPSON (Davenport) (15:52): I rise in support of the Child Sex Offenders Registration (Public Register) Amendment Bill 2024. At the 2022 election the Malinauskas Labor team committed to establishing a three-tiered model for access to the child sex offenders register, with this bill signalling delivery of that promise. There is nothing more important than the safety of our children, and we believe that South Australians have a right to know if their family is at risk from a sexual predator.

Parents should not have to worry that a babysitter, sports coach or anyone else who shares regular and unsupervised time with their child has any relevant criminal history, and as we progress this bill those assurances parents want are exactly what we seek to deliver. Aligning largely with WA's disclosure model, what we propose is a limited public disclosure scheme of three tiers.

Tier 1 is already in operation in South Australia, comprising a website with photos and personal details of reportable offenders who have either failed to comply with their reporting obligations or provided false or misleading information to police. Tier 2 is a locality search, providing a photo upon application of dangerous and high-risk offenders in the applicant's suburb or surrounding suburbs. Tier 3 is the community protection disclosure scheme, allowing a parent or guardian of a child to inquire about a specific person who has regular contact with that child.

You would be hard-pressed to find a parent or caregiver in my community who does not support this initiative, but the measures that this government is implementing to ensure the safety of children and families do not end there. Just last month, we passed nation-leading laws that allow authorities to indefinitely jail repeat serious sex offenders, with those offenders only eligible for release once they satisfy a court that they are able and willing to control their sexual instincts. If they cannot, those individuals will remain behind bars, exactly where my community wants and expects dangerous child sex offenders to be. There is more too, with increased penalties for child sex abuse offenders, like gross indecency, a legislative ban on child sex offenders working in places that hire underage employees and amendments to Carly's Law that strengthen penalties for offenders communicating with police officers posing as children.

This multifaceted approach to child and community safety presents a clear line in the sand. Child sex offenders will be met with the full force of the law and to those who cannot demonstrate the necessary change in behaviours, we are throwing away the key. Looking back to this bill and the tiers it introduces, tier 2 broadly captures registrable offenders who commit a further registrable offence, or any registrable offender the commissioner is satisfied poses a risk to the sexual safety of a person.

Applicants seeking access to tier 2 information will be required to enter and verify their home address and upon confirmation they will receive an email link containing watermarked photos of any offenders living in proximity of their home. Strict confidentiality provisions apply to this information, with the existing offence of up to 10 years' imprisonment for conduct intended to incite animosity retained. Access to this database is reserved for matters of community safety. This government will not tolerate acts of vigilantism.

Finally, tier 3 captures any registrable offender in regular contact with a child, with regular contact prescribed as three or more days in a year. Applications can be made to South Australia Police with the name of a person, be it a coach, a babysitter or other, with the applicant then provided any offending status via email link.

There are people in my community who have contacted me opposing not just this bill but other child safety measures implemented by this government as well. My message to those people is simple: if you do not abuse a child then your name will never appear on a public child sex offender database. My sympathies for those people, even the ones who have displayed a level of remorse and do not pose an ongoing risk, are limited.

Other amendments to child sex offenders legislation captured by this bill include changes to section 66M of the registration act, which will afford police officers authority to search and inspect items in the possession of all registrable offenders, both at home and away from their premises. Currently SAPOL can only conduct compliance searches for serious registrable offenders and not all registrable offenders. This amendment was requested by SAPOL and our government was happy to oblige.

Further amendment also clarifies the way in which reporting requirements apply to foreign registrable offenders, those foreign offenders being individuals convicted in another state or territory, or in a jurisdiction outside of Australia altogether. The amendment sets straight that offenders convicted in foreign jurisdictions should have reporting requirements imposed either interstate or overseas applied directly to them in the event that they relocate to South Australia. Again, in the interest of child and community safety, I anticipate my community's overwhelming support for these modest but sensible changes.

One final point that I would like to touch on, relevant to this legislation but applicable in several contexts, is that applications for information on the child sex offender register will be made through the digital police station. The digital police station is a $19 million budget commitment and not only will it save South Australians considerable time in not having to attend a physical police station for non-urgent matters but it will free up police resources as well.

Alongside assessing the public child sex offender register, you will be able to lodge national police certificate requests, enter vehicle collision reports, place freedom of information requests and more. I anticipate all elements of the digital police station will be up and running by the 2027-28 year, with efficiencies associated with this initiative expected to total 47 SAPOL employees.

Like my government colleagues, I look forward to realising those efficiencies as the station's functions gradually come online, just as I am eager to progress the important child safety legislation we debate today. I would just like to thank Minister Hildyard and Attorney-General Kyam Maher for their incredible leadership on this bill. I commend the bill to the house.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence, Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing) (15:59): It was just a short time ago that I was able to conclude my earlier remarks and thank the staff from the Attorney-General's Department and the Attorney-General's office. Can I also thank the shadow spokesperson and also the member for Davenport for their very sound contributions towards what is clearly a bill and a step forward that everybody in this house, and indeed in the other house, absolutely supports, as we should.

Bill read a second time.

Third Reading

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence, Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing) (16:00): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.