Child Sex Offenders Registration (Public Register) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 29 August 2024.)

The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (15:47): I rise today as the opposition spokesperson to express our unequivocal support for the Child Sex Offenders Registration (Public Register) Amendment Bill 2024. This bill represents a pivotal moment for our state and a necessary step in our collective efforts to safeguard the most vulnerable amongst us—our children.

Let's take a moment to reflect on the current state of affairs. Right now, members of the public in South Australia cannot request information about whether a registered child sex offender lives in their area. Think about that. In a world where we take so many precautions to protect our families, whether securing our homes or ensuring our schools are safe, parents, guardians and even concerned community members are left in the dark when it comes to something as fundamental as the safety of children.

This amendment seeks to change that. Importantly, it gives SA Police, subject to strict application processes, the authority to provide details and photographs of dangerous high-risk offenders in the applicant's suburb or nearby areas. This is not a decision to be made lightly, but it prioritises the safety of our children and our communities over everything else.

Clause 6 of the bill introduces some of the most significant changes. It ensures public access to the register for offenders who continue to pose a threat to the public, especially our children. Under this clause if a registered offender is found guilty of another serious sexual offence against a child or if the commissioner deems them to be a continuing danger to the lives or sexual safety of individuals, their details will be added to the public register.

I want to pause here. Consider this: imagine being a parent and sending your child off to school or to the local sports team or even to the playground, if there is someone in your community who has committed the most abhorrent acts against children and poses an ongoing risk. Would you not want to know? Would you not feel it is your right to be informed so you can take necessary precautions?

This bill is designed to provide critical information whilst ensuring that it is used responsibly. It is not a blanket release of information. There are rigorous safeguards in place, and the commissioner must consider multiple factors before any information is released—factors like the psychological and medical assessments of the offender, their patterns of behaviour and the age of their victim.

Importantly, this amendment ensures that child offenders, those under the age of 18, are excluded from being publicly identified. We understand that rehabilitation is key, and we are committed to balancing the need for public safety with fairness.

New sections 66FA and 66FB further outline the steps for individuals who wish to request information about offenders living in their area. The process is straightforward but thorough. Individuals will need to submit an application with a prescribed fee and provide any necessary evidence to the commissioner. This ensures that the system is not abused but instead used as intended—that is, to protect the public.

Moreover, the commissioner will have the discretion to decide whether or not releasing an image of an offender could risk identifying their victim. Victim's rights must always be protected. This bill recognises that the public's right to know cannot come at the expense of retraumatising those who have already suffered.

Clause 7 is equally important as it addresses the issue of vigilantism. We cannot and will not tolerate the misuse of this register. Let me be clear: this is a tool for protection, not persecution. Individuals who attempt to use this information for harassment or retribution will face serious penalties. The message is clear: you will be held accountable if you misuse this information.

In addition, this bill closes a critical loophole with clauses 3 and 4, which amend the definition of a 'foreign registrable offender' and 'foreign registrable offence'. This means that child sex offenders from outside South Australia will no longer be able to circumvent our reporting requirements by moving across state lines. We must ensure that our borders are not seen as a refuge for offenders looking to escape justice.

The bill also strengthens police search powers, expanding their ability to monitor all registered offenders, not just serious ones, and inspect any digital devices they own. This, too, is a necessary measure in a world where technology plays an increasing role in criminal activity.

We should not underestimate the impact of these reforms. This is a comprehensive approach to managing and monitoring child sex offenders. It empowers law enforcement, equips the public with critical information and closes loopholes that could otherwise be exploited. However, more than that, it sends a message. It tells the people of South Australia that their safety matters, that the safety of their children is paramount and that we will do everything within our power to protect them.

As I conclude, I want to emphasise that this bill is not about spreading fear or punishing offenders indefinitely. It is about transparency, safety and responsibility. It is about ensuring that every parent, guardian and community member has the tools they need to protect their loved ones. This bill gives us those tools, which is a step in the right direction for our state. I commend the bill to the chamber and thank my colleagues for their consideration.

The Hon. L.A. HENDERSON (15:53): I rise today to briefly speak in support of the Child Sex Offenders Registration (Public Register) Amendment Bill 2024. I indicate that the Hon. Nicola Centofanti MLC is the lead speaker for the opposition on this bill and has already articulated what this bill seeks to address.

The South Australian disclosure scheme follows the Western Australian model. Tier 1 of the model provides for the publication of the photos and information on registrable offenders who have not fulfilled their reporting requirements and whose location is unknown, as is already available under the Child Sex Offenders Registration Act. The purpose of the publication of the information is to find the wanted registrable offender and to keep the community informed.

Tier 2 will allow South Australia Police, subject to an approved application, to provide photographs of a dangerous and high-risk offender in an applicant's suburb or surrounding area and seeks to enhance public awareness and safety.

Tier 3 will establish a parental disclosure scheme, whereby the commissioner may provide a parent or guardian of a child with information about a specific person who has regular unsupervised contact with their child. This information is provided to better place a parent or guardian in a position to take appropriate steps to safeguard their children, if necessary.

Currently in South Australia members of the public cannot inquire to see whether a registered child sex offender lives in their area. It is crucial that we continue to do all that we can and do all that can be done to ensure a safe state for South Australia's most vulnerable, and to take all measures to protect those who cannot protect themselves. I have recently spoken in this place about the shocking number of cases listed in the South Australian District Court that are child sex assault and child exploitation related matters. We know that one in three girls and one in five boys are sexually assaulted by the time they turn 18.

The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse found that survivors of sexual assault take, on average, 24 years to tell someone what has happened to them. Some may ultimately never come forward and report these crimes. Naturally, that means the numbers we are looking at in the District Court are but a fraction of what it looks like in the community.

I raise this to indicate the serious need for initiatives to try to target and reduce offending against children and young people and to protect South Australian children. In doing so, it is important to balance the protection of the rights of the victims to ensure that they are not retraumatised or identified, whilst recognising the public's right to know and to be able to keep their children safe. In doing so, this cannot come at the expense of retraumatising those who have already been served a life sentence through no fault of their own at the hands of someone who should have kept them safe and who should have known better.

These measures will not only equip the police and commissioner with greater capabilities to ensure ongoing vigilance over those on the registry but also to further hold them accountable for their actions, together with the community, reinforcing the message that our state will not tolerate harm against children. It is my belief that it is everyone's responsibility to ensure that children are kept safe so they can maintain their innocence and their childhood for as long as possible.

It is vital that as a parliament we prioritise the safety of children and families and ensure that victims are kept at the centre of our response in doing so. Families should be equipped with this information to keep their families safe, and that is ultimately why I support this bill.

The Hon. S.L. GAME (15:57): I rise to offer full support for the government's tough approach on child sex offenders, and I commend the government for fulfilling its commitment to protect our children from predators. Members of the community can now apply to SAPOL for information that will identify high-risk offenders in their suburb and surrounding area, and this is an important and worthwhile measure that will improve public safety and awareness, which will ultimately reduce the risk to our children.

The parental disclosure scheme also offers parents a valuable tool to safeguard their children from being exposed to potential harm. If your child has regular unsupervised contact with an adult, a parent can now apply to the commissioner to be informed if the adult is a registerable offender. In response, the commissioner may inform the applicant if the adult is a registerable offender. Such measures do not eliminate all risks, but these are important measures that parents and members of the community can take to keep our children safe from those who could cause them harm. If even one child is kept safe because of these measures, it will be worth it. I commend the government for introducing these measures and pledge my ongoing support to keep our children safe.

The Hon. C. BONAROS (15:58): I rise today to speak in support of the Child Sex Offenders Registration (Public Register) Amendment Bill 2024 and note that this was a government election commitment, but one that obviously has the support of all of us in here, intended to increase community safety and raise awareness regarding high-risk child sex offenders.

While no legislation can offer a complete solution, I think the bill is a significant stride towards empowering families and protecting our children. As others have said, it introduces a structured three-tiered system designed to provide that clear practical mechanism for the community to access important information about registered child sex offenders, with appropriate safeguards of course in terms of privacy and confidentiality where necessary.

Tier 1, as we know, is already operational and already provides a public alert mechanism for locating offenders who are actively wanted by the police. As of today, I understand there are no wanted child sex offenders listed on that SAPOL website, but that existing tool ensures that information about those high-risk offenders, whose whereabouts are unknown, is accessible.

Tier 2 provides a locality search, which gives the opportunity to access non-identifying information about child sex offenders residing in a specific area, and I think it does strike the right balance between public safety and privacy. I understand the disclosure of information under this tier does not include identifying details such as names or photographs. Individuals will need to provide proof of their home address and discretion will remain with the police commissioner, importantly, to determine whether the disclosure is indeed appropriate, particularly in cases where the offender was of a similar age to the victim.

We have had lots of debates in this place about what we have dubbed the Romeo and Juliet cases. I think that is an important discretion that the commissioner has because there may be instances where somebody is on this register but the circumstances of how they came onto the register really need to be taken into account, so I think that is a very important inclusion in this bill.

Tier 3 introduces the disclosure scheme that allows parents or guardians to request specific information when they have concerns about a person who may have contact with their children, such as a babysitter or a private tutor or whatever the case may be. Those second and third tiers are also subject to stringent confidentiality rules in terms of ensuring that the release of information is handled responsibly and does not lead to unnecessary panic or indeed harassment.

I understand there are not going to be any fees for tier 2 or 3 applications so it will be accessible to all who have legitimate concerns. I do note the Western Australia model, which this bill closely mirrors, has been in operation for more than a decade and I understand there have not been any major issues raised about its operation, which is a good thing.

While there are valid concerns about the potential for vigilantism and I think that it is a genuine concern, or social exclusion of offenders, which is also a genuine concern when details are made public, the safeguards in the bill, such as withholding that identifying information and requiring proof of residence, are designed and do go towards mitigating those risks.

The bill provides a framework for empowering parents and making communities feel safer but we should not pretend it is a magic bullet. We all know it is not. The reality is that most child sex abuse occurs within the home or in the trusted family circle. Public registers are important but they are not designed to address those situations. They are for the most part a tool for preventing offences by strangers.

I note that in 2018 the Australian Institute of Criminology reviewed the impact of public sex offender registers in Australia and internationally, particularly in the UK and US, and the results were mixed, so we will have to wait and see. Some examples of public registers have led to job loss, social isolation and mental health issues for offenders—factors that increase the likelihood of reoffending, which is what we do not want.

I am satisfied that the bill does contain safeguards sufficient enough to prevent such outcomes but, as I said, I think it is very much a case of wait and see in that respect. If I can just give an example under tier 2, the lack of photos or specific identifying details is really intended to reduce the chances of mistaken identity or unjust targeting, and that is just one example. I guess the point is that this bill, and given the complexity of the area that we are dealing with, is not without its challenges.

I think also the state government indicated to me that funding has been made available in the most recent budget. The government has already committed to a virtual police station but we will have to watch this space because we simply do not know what is going to happen. We can look at what happened in WA but it will be a bit of a wait and see in terms of the capacity of our police force to handle an influx of inquiries from concerned parents, particularly those who may become overly vigilant. That is not a criticism; that is something we are going to have to watch, wait and see. We need to ensure, I guess, overwhelmingly, that SAPOL is actually equipped to manage this additional responsibility without diverting critical resources from other areas.

With those words, again, it is a credit to this parliament that we have some of what I think are the best child exploitation laws in the country, and this is complementary to that. We know that none of that will eradicate, sadly, child sexual abuse or entirely prevent reoffending, but this is certainly an important step towards making our communities feel safer. It will provide families with that practical tool to help protect their children from harm and I think, in that respect, strikes the reasonable balance between public safety and offender rehabilitation.

I do note the registration will apply to class 1 or 2 or high-risk offenders prescribed by regulations, and I foreshadow a couple of questions in relation to that aspect of the bill when we get to the committee stage of the debate.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector) (16:05): I want to thank all members who have made contributions on this important legislation. I want to thank them for their acknowledgements of the fact that we all have a sort of joint enterprise and commitment in keeping children in South Australia as safe as we can.

I look forward to the committee stage and then setting up this register that intends to keep children safe. As members have pointed out, we know from the experience of some 10 years of very similar schemes, such as that running in WA, that some of the legitimate fears that people hold about such things as vigilante action have not transpired.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clause 1.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I am interested to understand what the government is doing to prevent child sex offences before they happen and what early intervention measures are in place, in addition to, obviously, this bill and some of the other reforms we have dealt with in the parliament. Are there any measures that have been put in place to try to stop this kind of behaviour before it occurs?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: There absolutely and certainly are many measures that are in place; in fact, this chamber has considered and passed measures that go very directly to that in recent times. One of the measures is something that the Hon. Connie Bonaros championed, and that is making sure that child sex offenders do not work in the workplace directly with children, and that goes directly to a preventative measure to stop these sorts of things happening in the first place.

We passed laws in this chamber to strengthen Carly's Law, which make it abundantly clear that when an undercover police operative poses as a child, an offender can still be prosecuted because they thought it was a child that they were making contact with. We have very significantly increased the penalties to act as a deterrent for anybody who seeks to commit these crimes. This is, I do acknowledge, at the other end, once offences have occurred, but we absolutely have taken many measures to start to prevent it.

Probably the most substantial measure that we have taken is legislation that allows for the indefinite detention of repeat serious child sex offenders until they can demonstrate, to two independent court-appointed experts, that they are now willing and able to control their sexual instincts.

It is, I think, the most comprehensive suite of measures—aimed at exactly what the honourable member is talking about, those preventative measures to stop people committing these offences—that I have seen, certainly during my 20 years' involvement in South Australian politics and parliament, in one term of parliament. Good question.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: I have a couple of questions. The first is in relation to any notification requirement, which I did not pick up in the bill, of the actual offender. At what point are they notified, if at all, that their details are to be kept on a register and subject to release upon request?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: In the first instance, if someone is a registerable child sex offender they are aware because they have a whole lot of things, including reporting obligations, if they are on the register. In terms of are they specifically notified if an application has been made on level 2 or 3, if someone who lives in their suburb has sought a photograph or if they have regular contact with a child, there is not an automatic notification that goes to that person.

It may be the case that they become aware because they are asked to come in for an updated photograph to be taken and it may well be that they are told the purpose of that photograph. However, because there are very strict obligations on anyone to whom this information is given on not passing it on any further, there is no automatic notification to that offender.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Going on from that, I note that the bill talks about the class 1, class 2 and the high-risk offenders, and prescribed offences are actually inclusive of those three categories. Can the Attorney provide some examples of the sorts of offences? If I can use an example of a child-like sex doll, would that fall into one of those offences in class 1 or 2?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: It is not always easy because these generally list the section of various other statutes of the offence rather than the name of the offence, but I am advised that the offence the honourable member particularly refers to is a class 2 offence listed under subsection (g)(aa). An offence against section 63AAB of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act, possession of child-like sex dolls, is a class 2 offence. My advice is that you will be a registerable child sex offender for a class 2 sex offence unless there is only one offence and it has not involved prison time. Except for that, as a class 2 offender, you will be a registerable child sex offender.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: To be clear as a matter of the public record—and there is no eloquent way of saying this—it is not necessarily only linked to the actual offending against a physical child, the offences may apply to somebody who has indeed committed child exploitation material offences, including photos, pictures, depictions, and the child-like sex doll offences that I referred to earlier?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: Absolutely. There are various child exploitation material (CEM) offences in class 1 offences where any conviction has you as a registerable child sex offender. So, absolutely, there is a huge range of offences. There are contact offences that directly abuse a child, but there is a very large range of offences where it is not a contact offence, but of course when you produce or you procure child exploitation material you are necessarily creating a market for this sort of vile material that directly leads to the abuse of children.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: Can the Attorney advise what support exists for survivors of child sex offences and what the government is doing in terms of providing services and support to them?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I do not have a list of specific programs. There are a range of programs that aim to support victims through victim support services, through a whole range of other areas. If the honourable member is happy I am happy to take that on notice and provide a more comprehensive response than I am able to do immediately.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: The government has referenced the WA example; I understand there was reference to that in crafting this legislation. Is the minister able to advise on whether there have been any increases in cases of vigilantism in that jurisdiction, and is he able to advise whether or not this new register has resulted in a reduction in offences in that jurisdiction?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I thank the honourable member for his question. I will take the second one first in relation to a reduction in offences as a result. I am advised that we do not have information on that. I think it would be difficult to measure it as being a result of one thing in particular—has that reduced offences, that causation from only one measure—when there are many measures. As we have already discussed here, just in the last year or so we have taken many measures in South Australia.

In relation to the question about vigilantism, I am advised that we have asked and the advice we have received is that there is no evidence of vigilantism as a result of the 10 or so years of operation of this very similar three-tiered register in Western Australia.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: Is the minister satisfied that there are sufficient safeguards in place in his legislation to prevent vigilante behaviour?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: Yes, I thank the honourable member for his question. That is exactly why there are prohibitions against further publishing material that a person receives as a result of an application to the scheme. That is exactly directed at deterring vigilantism, which seems to have been very successful in WA, which has similar provisions.

I might just add, too, one other thing that occurs to me from the member's previous question about support for victims: of course, the National Redress Scheme for people who have experienced institutional child sexual abuse has very strong mechanisms of supports for victim survivors of this sort of abuse.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I realise I did not speak at the second reading stage, so I might just use this opportunity to indicate that the Greens will be supporting the bill. Of course, we share the concerns of all honourable members in this place about the need to prevent this kind of offending in our state, so we will be supporting the bill before us.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Just finally, and I touched on this during my second reading contribution, but I really want the Attorney to confirm again for the record, particularly as these laws relate to adolescents and young people and would capture things like sexting, that there is this discretion that absolutely lies with the police commissioner in terms of the disclosure of that material if it were not to serve any useful benefit, particularly given the age of the person it may relate to?

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: I thank the honourable for her question. My advice is that offenders under 18 are excluded from the operation of this scheme, but for the tier 2 offending there is that discretion not to disclose. There are a range of circumstances, but in particular where disclosure may tend to identify the victim in a case is particularly what that is aimed at.

Clause passed.

Remaining clauses (2 to 9) and title passed.

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector) (16:19): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.