Limitation of Actions (Child Abuse) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 2 August 2018.)

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (16:14): I thank honourable members for their contribution on this bill. This has been a longstanding Liberal Party policy and also one championed by the Hon. John Darley. We have seen the need for the limitation period for child sexual offences to go beyond the 21-year age limit and ensure that appropriate redress and compensation is granted.

Beyond this bill, this government has fully funded the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse over the next 10 years. On behalf of the government, we note the amendments that have been filed by the Hon. Mr Maher on this bill. On behalf of the government, I will speak to those amendments in more detail during the committee stages but would like to state to the council the government are supportive of the second package of amendments I understand are to be moved by the honourable member.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clause 1.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I might indicate, just for the benefit of members, there was a suite of five amendments under [Maher-1], which will not be proceeded with, and, in lieu, the second suite, [Maher-2] amendments 1 to 5. In speaking to the very first amendment, Amendment No 1 [Maher-2], it might be useful to set out what the amendments do. The first one is on clause 1 but the rest are on clause 4, and I think it would be of benefit to speak to what the amendments do in totality. I do not propose, unless there are specific questions, to speak to the amendments again.

Currently, the act talks about child sexual abuse. The first suite of amendments that I will not proceed with sought to broaden it to include abuse and neglect. After some very helpful discussions with the government, what we have done instead is delete the word 'sexual' from' child sexual abuse', so in the act the term is 'child abuse' rather than 'child sexual abuse'.

The deletion of the word 'sexual' is in amendments 1 to 4 of [Maher-2]. In amendment No. 5 [Maher-2], it defines what that abuse is defined as. The abuse outlined in amendment No. 5 [Maher-2] includes sexual abuse, serious physical abuse or psychological abuse related to sexual abuse or serious physical abuse. In the first amendment we delete the word 'sexual' from 'child sexual abuse' to read just 'child abuse', and the next three amendments also do exactly the same thing in different parts of the bill. The fifth amendment then defines what is meant by abuse and includes those three elements.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: I rise on behalf of the government to indicate, as I said in the second reading, that the government intends to support the package of amendments. As the Leader of the Opposition has done, I intend to address my comments to the package of amendments—all five amendments. We also thank the Leader of the Opposition for the co-operative nature, as I understand it, of discussions between the Attorney's very capable staff and the Leader of the Opposition in relation to this alternative package of amendments.

I am as advised as follows. The government supports these amendments. The bill removes the limitations of actions for civil claims arising from child sexual abuse. This change is one of the key recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. The bill has been developed in recognition of the fact that limitation periods, which have an important role in the justice system, are incompatible with what we now know about sexual abuse and disclosure by its survivors. For example, we know that many survivors of sexual abuse are unable to disclose their experiences until well into adulthood. Analysis of evidence given at the royal commission revealed that, on average, it took survivors 22 years to disclose their sexual abuse.

Sexual abuse can take many forms, but it often involves psychological manipulation or grooming to establish the child's trust and prevent them from disclosing the offending. A child may be manipulated into thinking the abuse is their fault or that they will be blamed if they reveal what is happening. For some it may take years before they realise the gravity of what was done to them and what action they may take.

Even then, victims often feel embarrassed or ashamed to talk about their experiences, and seeking legal advice may not be their first priority. The royal commission recognises that it makes little sense to talk of a victim sleeping on their rights if they do not know they may have a claim or they may face substantial psychological barriers in disclosing the essential elements of the claim.

The amendments moved by the Hon. Mr Maher propose to expand the scope of the bill beyond claims resulting from child sexual abuse. In particular, they expand its scope to include other forms of child abuse including:

(a) sexual abuse;

(b) serious physical abuse; and

(c) psychological abuse related to sexual abuse or serious physical abuse.

Although the inquiries of the royal commission were limited to the experience of people affected by institutional sexual abuse, it is evident that some of its findings have wider application. The government has recognised that the barriers faced by victims in overcoming the time bar for civil claims is not limited to those who suffered abuse while under the care of public or private institutions. That is why this bill applies to all victims who were sexually abused as a child, regardless of the context in which that abuse took place.

Similarly, these amendments recognise that victims of serious physical abuse may experience some of the same barriers to redress as those who have suffered sexual abuse. It further recognises that perpetrators of serious physical abuse or sexual abuse often inflict psychological abuse on their victims. The government supports the amendments, which seek to remove the barrier currently imposed by the Limitation of Actions Act for a broader range of survivors of child abuse.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: I rise to indicate SA-Best support for this package of amendments, as described by the Hon. Kyam Maher, which broaden the scope of abuse to include serious physical abuse, psychological abuse related to sexual abuse or serious physical abuse in addition to sexual abuse. I am pleased the government has seen fit to support this measure, which will now have multipartisan support. This should send a clear message that this parliament will not tolerate barriers to redress when it comes to serious abuse against children.

As we know, in the past limitation periods have often served as insurmountable barriers for survivors of sexual abuse pursuing civil litigation. As I have said in this place before, and as the Treasurer has just alluded to, it can take victims many years, in most cases at least 23 years, to tell someone about the abuse they have sustained. We also know that there are a number of facts that influence how and to whom a victim is likely to disclose the nature of the abuse they have sustained, if at all. Allowing these artificial barriers to exist simply prolongs the suffering of those victims who finally reach a point in their life when they are ready to deal with the pain they have suffered. As we know, the consequences of sexual abuse are, more often than not, lifelong.

Given the nature of the offending we are talking about it makes perfect sense to extend the definition to serious physical abuse and psychological abuse. In fact, this is in line with recent changes to the New South Wales' legislation and the Law Society's recommendations to this bill. The reality is that one would be hard pressed to point to a case of sexual abuse that did not contain some element of serious physical or psychological abuse. Of course, victims will still need to make out their case and meet the requisite standard of proof, and the changes under this bill do nothing to detract from that legal requirement.

In closing I would like to acknowledge and thank, on our behalf anyway, the work of CLAN for its ongoing advocacy and leadership in this vital area of legislative reform. These are very sensible amendments that have been proposed and, on behalf of SA-Best, I am pleased to indicate our unequivocal support.

The Hon. M.C. PARNELL: I will add my voice to what I believe will be a unanimous decision of this council to support these amendments. I congratulate the Hon. Kyam Maher for bringing them forward and also for sensibly negotiating with the government, because I think it is fair to say that the first lot of amendments probably went a little bit too far; I think they effectively removed the statute of limitations for just about anything to do with children, and I do not think that was the intent of the bill. However, the current amendments, which I think are going to have unanimous support, are a sensible extension.

As the Hon. Connie Bonaros said, the Law Society drew our attention to the situation in New South Wales where they had modified the definition of 'child abuse' to incorporate the matters that are in the opposition amendments—that is, sexual abuse, serious physical abuse, or psychological abuse that is related to sexual abuse or serious physical abuse. I think they are sensible amendments. For all the reasons that other members have said, and the Treasurer in his contribution, we know from the evidence of the royal commission that it can take decades for people to come forward with their experiences, so having an artificial statute of limitations that prevents people from getting justice is not acceptable. It is artificial, and I am glad that this bill will be removing that barrier.

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY: For the record, I indicate that I will be supporting the opposition's package of five amendments.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I want to place on the record appreciation for the member for Badcoe, Jayne Stinson, in another place, the shadow minister for child protection. As much as I would like to be congratulated for the great work in negotiation that I do, I must say the member for Badcoe is the lead on this as the shadow minister for child protection. She has done a great job working with the good folk in the Attorney-General's office to make this a reality.

The CHAIR: To assist the progress of the committee, it will be my plan to ask the Leader of the Opposition to move amendment No. 1. Before I ask him to do that, does any member wish to speak on any particular clause at this point in time? I thank the honourable members. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to move amendment No. 1.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I move:

Amendment No 1 [Maher–2]—

Page 2, line 4—Delete 'Sexual'

Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

Clauses 2 and 3 passed.

Clause 4.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I move:

Amendment No 2 [Maher–2]—

Page 2, line 14 [clause 4, heading to inserted Part 1A]—Delete 'sexual'

Amendment No 3 [Maher–2]—

Page 2, line 15 [clause 4, heading to inserted section 3A]—Delete 'sexual'

Amendment No 4 [Maher–2]—

Page 2, line 17 [clause 4, inserted section 3A(1)]—Delete 'sexual'

Amendment No 5 [Maher–2]—

Page 3, after line 20 [clause 4, inserted section 3A]—After inserted subsection (4) insert:

(5) In this section—

abuse includes any of the following:

(a) sexual abuse;

(b) serious physical abuse;

(c) psychological abuse related to sexual abuse or serious physical abuse.

Amendments carried; clause as amended passed.

Schedule and title passed.

Bill reported with amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (16:28): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.