Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Bills Statutes Amendment (Victims of Crime) Bill STATUTES AMENDMENT (VICTIMS OF CRIME) BILL Second Reading Second Reading Adjourned debate on second reading. (Continued from 24 March 2009. Page 1628.) The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY Legislative Council Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:23): I understand that everyone who wished to speak on this bill has done so, and I thank honourable members for their contribution to the debate. The Hon. Mr Wade asked why the provision dealing with restraining orders to be made against offenders is confined, at least at this stage, to sexual offences. The answer is that the government was advised by the Commissioner for Victims' Rights that that was where the problem lay, in practice. Of course, nothing in the bill in any way operates to prevent a court making a restraining order against an offender in other appropriate cases. However, I am sure that the honourable member will acknowledge that sexual offences are always special and different from other offences because of the sexual element. There are, for example, special rules of evidence, special rules of procedure, and special and particular rules of the criminal law generally that deal specifically with sexual offences. It is not so odd that this provision is confined, at least in the first instance, to sexual offences. Both the Hon. Mr Wade and the Hon. Mr Parnell drew attention to the proposed amendments to the Freedom of Information Act. The government recognises the sensitivity of this subject. Of course, everyone has a natural interest in keeping FOI laws as open as possible and limiting prohibitions against disclosure; that is natural and to be expected. I recognise that both honourable members are taking a responsible position—as there are many things in the office of the commissioner that should not be subject to disclosure—and want to find a compromise position. I will be interested to see any proposal. In the meantime, I point out that the proposal merely puts the commissioner on the same basis as, for example, the Parole Board, the Ombudsman and the Police Complaints Authority. One might equally say to the Hon. Mr Parnell that a submission to a law reform inquiry by the Ombudsman is similarly exempt; and that may be a good thing. The Commissioner for Victims' Rights may well use as examples information about victims that should not be made public, so there are arguments to be made here. We will proceed further with that in the committee stage. I commend the bill to members. Bill read a second time.