HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2022-11-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio) Bill

Second Reading

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS (Cheltenham—Minister for Police, Emergency Services and Correctional Services) (12:00): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I rise to introduce the Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio) Bill 2022. To ensure the government and related legislation continues to operate in a business as usual manner, the Attorney-General's portfolio bill is required to rectify minor errors, omissions and other deficiencies identified in legislation committed to the Attorney-General.

As is typical of these portfolio bills, the bill makes various amendments to a small number of acts within the Attorney-General's portfolio, as well as further justice-related amendments, to give effect to certain reforms that were previously contained in the Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio and Other Justice Measures) Bill 2021.

That bill was introduced in parliament last year but unfortunately did not pass under the former government before the end of the sitting. The bill seeks to implement a number of priority amendments contained within the former bill. These amendments are all minor or technical changes that are intended to address anomalies or other issues that have the potential to cause confusion or inefficiency. The government agrees that it is appropriate to progress these amendments without further delay to ensure the proper and efficient functioning of the justice system. Further consideration will be given to the need to progress any of the other amendments from this previous bill in due course.

Turning to the substance of the bill, part 2 of the bill amends the Bail Act 1985. Clauses 3, 4 and 5 of the bill amend the Bail Act to allow for the court to prescribe the wording and form of certain documents used in bail proceedings where the court is the relevant bail authority. These amendments replace the existing requirement for those documents to be in a prescribed form. The requirement for all other bail agreements to be in a prescribed form remains the same. The courts have indicated that they would prefer to have the flexibility to prescribe the form of these documents. This would allow for greater harmonisation with the broader rollout of the Electronic Court Management System to the criminal and protection jurisdictions of the court that has just commenced.

Clause 6 of the bill amends section 11 of the Bail Act, which deals with conditions of bail, to clarify who is the relevant bail authority where a person on bail seeks approval to travel interstate. Currently, section 11(6) of the Bail Act provides that permission to leave the state may be granted by a judge, magistrate or police officer above a certain rank. This means that in theory a police officer could give permission for a person on bail to travel interstate where bail was originally granted by a court.

For the avoidance of doubt, the amendments clarify that where the relevant bail authority is a court, permission to leave the state must be sought from a court. Similarly, where the relevant bail authority is a police officer, permission to leave the state must be sought from a police officer who is above the rank of sergeant or the responsible officer for a police station.

Part 3 of the bill amends the Burial and Cremation Act 2013 to remedy an inconsistency between the Burial and Cremation Act and the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1996 in relation to the certification requirements for the issuing of a cremation permit. Section 10(5)(b)(i) of the Burial and Cremation Act currently provides that the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages must not issue a cremation permit unless the application is accompanied by two death certificates issued under section 36 of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act, this being one certificate signed by a medical practitioner who was responsible for the deceased's medical care immediately before the death or has examined the body of the deceased after death, and a second certificate signed by another medical practitioner.

This is inconsistent with the existing requirements of section 36 of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act, which only contemplates the provision of one death certificate, being a certificate from a doctor who was responsible for the deceased person's medical care immediately before death or who examined the body after death. To avoid confusion the bill amends the Burial and Cremation Act to clarify that while two death certificates are still required to issue a cremation permit, only one death certificate needs to be provided under section 36 of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act, with the second death certificate to be in a form determined by the registrar.

Part 4 of the bill amends section 66 of the Correctional Services Act 1982 to remove a now obsolete reference to a repealed definition of 'serious drug offence' within the meaning of the Sentencing Act 2017 and reinserts the repealed definition into the Correctional Services Act 1982. The amendment will rectify a procedural anomaly caused by the amendments to the Sentencing Act 2017 overtaking the Correctional Services (Accountability and Other Measures) Amendment Act 2021 in parliament last year.

The practical effect of these amendments is to ensure that prisoners who have been sentenced to imprisonment for less than five years in respect of a serious drug offence are not entitled to automatic release on parole at the end of their non-parole period. Instead, parole in these cases will be at the discretion of the Parole Board.

While the bill contains a relatively small number of amendments, it addresses important issues to ensure that our justice system continues to work effectively, and effectively for our community. I commend the bill to members and 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 Bail Act 1985

3—Amendment of section 6—Nature of bail agreement

This amendment allows a bail agreement, in circumstances where the bail authority is a court, to be in a form determined by the court. The requirement for all other bail agreements to be in the prescribed form remains.

4—Amendment of section 7—Guarantee of bail

This amendment allows a bail agreement, in circumstances where the bail authority is a court, to be in a form determined by the court. The requirement for all other bail agreements to be in the prescribed form remains.

5—Amendment of section 8—Form of application

This amendment allows a bail agreement, in circumstances where the bail authority is a court, to be in a form determined by the court. The requirement for all other bail agreements to be in the prescribed form remains.

6—Amendment of section 11—Conditions of bail

This clause amends the provisions of section 11(6)(c) to clarify that the conditions of bail in relation to allowing a person to leave the State may only be varied with the permission of a judge or magistrate (if the bail authority is a court) or a police officer of or above the rank of sergeant or the responsible officer for a police station (if the bail authority is a police officer).

Part 3—Amendment of Burial and Cremation Act 2013

7—Amendment of section 10—Cremation permits

This amendment clarifies the requirements for 2 certificates to be provided as set out in section 10(5)(b), the first being a certificate under section 36(3) of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1996 certifying that the deceased died from natural causes signed by a medical practitioner in accordance with the requirements set out in that subparagraph, and the second a certificate in a form approved by the Registrar signed by another medical practitioner.

Part 4—Amendment of Correctional Services Act 1982

8—Amendment of section 66—Automatic release on parole for certain prisoners

These amendments remove a reference to a repealed definition of serious drug offence within the Sentencing Act 2017 and insert the repealed definition into section 66.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (12:07): I have followed along with the minister just now, and the reason I reflect on it now is that, relevantly, the minister's contribution departed from the words of the Attorney of 5 May in the second reading in another place only insofar as it reflected on the inclusion, in this short subset bill, of clause 6 which was part of the original portfolio bill introduced in the last parliament by the previous government and again features in the bill I introduced earlier in the year.

It is only there because it was an amendment moved by the Liberal Party in the other place, providing for the appropriate authority to deal with any application for travel interstate. So it is good that is there and that it is whole. The observation I make about this is that it is one of those examples of how this parliament can operate in an edifying and efficient way on the one hand and, on the other, it can engage in the most stupefying delay, regurgitation and rehearsal. I do not want to overdo this. On my last count, we now have about five portfolio bills that are on their way through the house.

The only explanation that I have been given for why this particular bill contains only those amendments, which have been described now in the other place and again repeated by the minister just now to the Bail Act, the Burial and Cremation Act and the Correctional Services Act (a subset of the previous portfolio bill), and why that lot has been carved out and presented separately was that they were somehow deemed to be of greater priority.

The unedifying aspect of that is that here we are and, by the time that all makes its way through to this place, we actually have the balance of these uncontroversial provisions sitting there in parallel legislation that may as well all be wrapped up again, and it happens all to be there on the face of the portfolio bill which I introduced and which has been on the Notice Paper now ever since the beginning of June. I am not going to stay on it for any longer, but I want to address one matter of substance.

On 1 June, a day that had the spotlight shone on it for completely unnecessary reasons—because I thought I had taken what was a completely uncontroversial step in reintroducing all this uncontroversial legislative amendment from the previous government—I gave the house notice in private members' time that this would take a while because it is the whole suite of amendments: 'Here they all are. They're uncontroversial. Tell me if they're not, and I'll need a bit more than the standard 15 minutes to do that,' so I sought leave at the outset.

On that occasion—and bearing in mind it is private members' time and it is the short period of time allocated for private members' debate—far from engaging in the question of the merits, the Manager of Government Business took such umbrage at the prospect of that extra time (provided for in the standing orders) being taken to step through the introduction of these matters that he blew a fuse and moved a motion to adjourn debate on my bill to about now, to about November.

He saw the error of his ways subsequently and came back in here with his tail between his legs and moved a motion restoring it to the Notice Paper at a more orderly time, and I am glad that he did. I am glad that we all had a reminder of the proper role of private members' time and the fact that it is not really within the government's purview to determine how that might be ordered—far from the government having any right to prior notice about how private members conduct themselves in this house.

However, the irony of that was that, but for that seeing sense, we could have actually found ourselves in a situation where we had all these portfolio bills all being moved in unison and the whole parliament found itself having been delayed for more than a year. I just indicate that very briefly. I would love to see a means by which, where we are dealing with legislation that is of a workmanlike and ordinary nature that is uncontroversial, we do not need to have some sort of race for credit about who authored what and we do not need to have some sort of process of filling the Notice Paper with lots of piecemeal provisions.

We really do not edify this place by going through a process of rehearsing what the subject of these things are. There is plenty of area for public interest debate beyond it. I just make those observations in the particular context of the way this has found its way here.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Heysen, I apologise for interrupting, but just confirm for me that you are the lead speaker on this matter.

Mr TEAGUE: I anticipate that is correct, Mr Deputy Speaker.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I will just draw your attention—while I have been pretty lenient about how you have meandered around the issue, I would like you to get back to the substance of the bill, please, at some point.

Mr TEAGUE: The changes that are to be applied have been summarised by the minister. I will not repeat them, but I indicate that clause 6 has found its way back into the bill. It is not clear to me why these three pieces of legislation were carved out in the first place from the overall bill, but that is a matter for the government. It is particularly unclear to me why clause 6 was omitted in the form that it was introduced by the Attorney in the other place, but it is appropriate that it is there.

This is a matter for the government and the advice that it has taken, and it might be a matter for the committee briefly, but I flag that there may be a possibility to consider the circumstances of a section 5(1)(f) situation, in which section 5(2)(a) applies, where the court has determined a prescribed person. I expect that is something the government has turned its mind to, and I might take the opportunity to ask about that in committee, unless the minister would like to address that by way of any closing remarks on the second reading debate. With those words, I commend the bill to the house.

Mrs PEARCE (King) (12:17): I rise to speak in support of the Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio) Bill today. This portfolio bill takes the most urgent of three sections from last year's Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio and Other Justice Measures) Bill to ensure that government and related legislation continues to operate as efficiently as it can.

Whilst the amendments are all minor and technical in nature, they address anomalies and other issues which have the potential to cause confusion, inefficiency or impede process improvements. Part 2 of the bill seeks to amend the Bail Act 1984. This will give greater flexibility to the courts in how they prescribe the wording and forms of documents which are used in bail proceedings where the court is the relevant bail authority. This amendment replaces existing requirements for those documents to be in a prescribed form, which will allow the courts greater flexibility during the rollout of their Electronic Court Management System.

Part 3 of the bill amends the Burial and Cremation Act 2014 to remedy an inconsistency with the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1996, clarifying that while two death certificates are required to issue a cremation permit only one needs to be provided, and section 36 of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act, with that second certificate to be in a form determined by the registrar.

Part 4 will amend section 66 of the Correctional Services Act 1982 to remove an obsolete reference to a repealed definition of 'serious drug offence' in the Sentencing Act 2017 and will reinsert the repealed definition into the Correctional Services Act 1982, ensuring that prisoners sentenced to less than five years' imprisonment for serious drug offences are not entitled to automatic release on parole at the end of their non-parole period. This will give the decision-making authority to the Parole Board, and it will be at their discretion whether an offender is ready to serve the rest of their sentence in the community.

As I said earlier, the amendments are all minor and technical in nature, but by addressing the anomalies and other issues which have the potential to cause confusion or inefficiency or impede process improvements they will help make a fundamental difference to our state, particularly when it comes to community justice and ensuring our communities are safe and strong.

We see it today with this keen eye for detail to get the legislation right, just as we have seen it in the work we have been progressing in the Attorney-General's space, whether it be in passing legislation in line with our election commitment to strengthen Carly's Law alongside an increase in penalties for a range of child sex offences, ensuring predators spend more time behind bars, significantly increasing the maximum penalty for gross indecency with or in the presence of a child from five years to fifteen years in prison and, just as importantly, targeting online predators who download, share or create despicable child abuse material.

We have brought in legislation to scrap age categories for vile image-based offending, meaning offenders who previously could have faced a lesser penalty when the age of the victim was unknown will no longer be shown leniency, with such offences involving children of all ages now being penalised more harshly.

We are also restoring funding to the Women's Domestic Violence Court Assistance Service, which provides significant support to survivors of domestic and family violence by helping them to access and secure necessary legal protections against abusive partners. Its services include assisting women to apply for intervention orders, report any breaches of an order and end tenancy agreements to help keep them safe. By restoring this funding, we are helping to ensure the service can continue and cope with growing demand, as we know around 800 women are already accessing support each year.

Whilst I am on the topic of what we are doing to support women, I am so pleased that we are in the final stages of negotiation for funding the Working Women's Centre to provide frontline support to address workplace sexual harassment and discrimination. I understand that last financial year, 14 per cent of inquiries that were made to the centre were about sexual harassment and a further 38 per cent were about sexual harassment and discrimination. The support we will be providing will allow the centre to reach more women and allow them to come forward in a safe way, which has not always been the case.

It is an incredibly important step, one that aligns with the recommendations made by federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins during her 2021 review, because we are listening, and we are serious about justice for all. I thank Abbey and the incredible team at the Working Women's Centre for all of the amazing work they do to support women and educate workplaces and for all the steps they are taking to help us instil gender equality and respect for girls and women across the board so that we can make our workplaces safer for all.

We are also providing a funding boost to support the Operation Ironside trials, one of the most complex law enforcement operations in our country's history, by allocating $8.8 million over the next four years to support the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to effectively handle these matters as they progress through the courts, with funding to provide for additional staff with scope to also recruit more Sheriff's Officers and judge's associates so there is an efficient and consistent approach to these matters.

And we are not done yet. I would like to take this opportunity to applaud the Attorney-General for the work that is currently being undertaken to seek the implementation of the Uluru Statement, including the restarting of the Aboriginal Voice to Parliament following respectful consultation, establishing a truth-telling process and Treaty, because we have so much to learn from the oldest living culture in the world, one that is so heavily engrained and reflected in our lands. We have a responsibility to listen to the voice of the Aboriginal people and to be able to genuinely work with them as one towards a fairer and more reconciled country.

Just recently, I attended an event with the member for Newland for KSJ, a 100 per cent Aboriginal-owned business that is focused on creating jobs, career pathways and business opportunities for Aboriginal people. I thank the amazing people at KSJ, particularly Kiara, for all the time that has been taken to help me better understand what we need to be looking at to support active steps in this space.

It is safe to say that our accomplishments so far in only six months have been bold when it comes to justice reform, and what I have reflected here are only a few of the many active steps we are taking in this space. We make no apologies for remaining bold in our plans to see them through, further protecting South Australians and ensuring that our state is safer and a more equal state that we can be proud of living in. Our communities expect no less from us. With that, I commend the bill to the house.

S.E. ANDREWS (Gibson) (12:25): I rise to speak on the Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio) Bill 2022. This takes the most urgent sections from last year's Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio and Other Justice Measures) Bill to ensure that government and related legislation continue to operate as business as usual. The bill will provide more flexibility to our courts, clarify an inconsistency in legislation, and remove an obsolete reference to a repealed definition. What it does is demonstrate a government that is committed to ensuring our community is safe.

One of the changes in this bill ensures prisoners sentenced to less than five years' imprisonment for a serious drug offence are not entitled to automatic release on parole at the end of their non-parole period. The decision on whether to grant parole will be at the discretion of the Parole Board, which is the appropriate body to assess whether the offender can re-enter the community.

I am proud to be part of a Malinauskas Labor government that is committed to progressive reforms to ensure that the victims of crime and the most vulnerable in our community have fair and safe access to the justice system. In our first eight months in office, we have already taken action, including passing legislation, as per our election commitment, to strengthen Carly's Law and increase penalties for a range of child sex offences. The state government has also provided $150,000 in funding for the Victim Support Service Court Companions initiative, and—

Mr TEAGUE: Point of order: I just make the observation—pursuant to standing order 127, of course—that digression in these circumstances is particularly to be noted. In circumstances where the minister and members opposite have described, inaccurately, this bill as having a discrete subset subject matter that is supposedly an urgent subset of the broader portfolio bill, this is clearly digression and in circumstances where there are plenty of other justice portfolio bills on the Notice Paper. So, if anyone wants to catalogue the achievements or otherwise of the government in relation to areas as diverse as we have heard about already in the debate, then those opportunities will come, but I do ask that you direct the member's contribution back to the particular subject matter of this bill. It is interesting—

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: Sir—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, hold on, let him finish. He has not finished yet.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: Well, I raise a point of order.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Minister, take your seat, please. He needs to finish first and I will give you a chance.

Mr TEAGUE: I have finished. I ask you, Deputy Speaker, to bring the member back to the subject matter of the bill.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am not ruling in favour of your point of order. You probably would have had more help had you not digressed in your own contribution to this chamber, but I will put that aside for a moment. My understanding is that, as the bill deals with the Attorney-General's portfolio, a range of bills dealing with justice issues, I am more than happy for members to provide any contribution that provides context to those justice issues. That is my ruling. Member for Gibson, do you wish to continue?

S.E. ANDREWS: The Court Companions initiative provides support to victims, witnesses and their families in criminal courts across South Australia. It is a free and confidential service and crucial to assist victims who need support during the court experience. The Court Companions are trained and experienced to work with victims and witnesses of all ages. While Safer Spaces provides confidential telephone support to victims of crime, navigating the criminal justice system—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Member for Gibson, can you hold on a second. If the minister and the member for Heysen wish to continue—I am warning both the minister and the member for Heysen. If they wish to continue, they do so outside the chamber or I will ask them to leave. That is your choice. I think we owe the member for Gibson the courtesy to hear her in silence.

S.E. ANDREWS: I thank the staff and volunteers of the Victim Support Service for their work to support our constituents. It is true that all women, regardless of age, background, residential location or wealth, will very likely experience or witness domestic and family violence. It is important, therefore, that as a government we have delivered on our election commitment to restore funding to the Women's Domestic Violence Court Assistance Service. The service provides support to women affected by domestic and family violence, primarily relating to helping women apply for intervention orders and ending tenancy agreements.

Additionally, the state government is currently in the final stages of negotiation for funding the Women's Legal Service to provide face-to-face legal advice and education to vulnerable women at risk of or experiencing domestic violence and family violence in the northern and southern regions.

I can only imagine the fear of victims who have been subjected to domestic and family violence, to know that the offender is in society, potentially tracking them down to further perpetrate violence. The government will be introducing legislation to ensure monitoring of domestic violence defendants on bail. I want to take this opportunity to thank the staff and volunteers at all domestic and family violence services across our state for the work they do supporting women and children.

Workplace sexual harassment and discrimination will affect one in three women in our community and, as we know, it can occur in small and large businesses, not-for-profit organisations and right here in state parliament. Recognising this, the state government is currently in the final stages of negotiation for funding for the Working Women's Centre to provide frontline support to address workplace sexual harassment and discrimination. Centre director, Abbey Kendall, recently told the ABC, and I quote:

In the last financial year 14 per cent of inquiries to the centre were about sexual harassment and a further 38 per cent were about sexual harassment and discrimination.

I am proud to have been a committee member of the Working Women's Centre. I have seen firsthand the important work they do assisting women who are underpaid, mistreated or abused by their employers. Abbey and her entire team do a fantastic job and I thank them deeply on behalf of all women who have benefited from their work. The state government will be introducing legislation to make the experience of domestic violence a ground of discrimination in the Equal Opportunity Act.

An issue that is gaining recognition but has been occurring in our community for generations, coercive control, describes the systematic pattern of behaviour used by a person to dominate and control another person, usually an intimate partner. It is almost exclusively perpetrated by men against women and includes emotional and financial abuse, stalking and intimidation.

It is very difficult for women to escape from a partner exercising coercive control. This behaviour affects a diverse group of women, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women, women from migrant backgrounds, women living in rural, regional and remote areas, and LGBTIQA+ people. This is why our Malinauskas Labor government will be introducing legislation to criminalise coercive control.

Finally, our government has committed to investigating changes to victim impact statements. We have supported in principle changes to the Sentencing Act 2017 to provide that victim impact statements should not be edited for admissibility purposes and that it should be left to the judge or magistrate to exercise discretion as to admissibility of content in a victim impact statement.

As a responsible government, we will be undertaking consultation on the proposed reform before progressing any legislative changes. We are a government that puts the victims first, protects their rights, provides them with appropriate support and assistance and ensures that contemporary laws are in place to protect our community, particularly women and children. I commend this bill to the house.

Ms WORTLEY (Torrens) (12:34): I rise to speak on the Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio) Bill. While this portfolio bill addresses the most urgent sections from last year's Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio and Other Justice Measures) Bill to make sure the wheels of justice are turning, most of the amendments in the bill before us are minor. I will just go through them briefly before I proceed to talk about some of the other things in the justice area that our government is effecting.

Part 2 of the bill before us amends the Bail Act 1985 to allow the courts more flexibility with prescribing the form of documents during the rollout of their electronic court management system. Part 3 amends the Burial and Cremation Act 2013 to remedy an inconsistency with the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1996. It clarifies that, while death certificates are still required to issue a cremation permit, only one needs to be provided under section 36 of the BDMR Act, with a second certificate to be informed and determined by the Registrar.

Part 4 amends section 66 of the Correctional Services Act 1982 to remove an obsolete reference to a repealed definition of 'serious drug offence' in the Sentencing Act 2017 and reassert a repealed definition into the Correctional Services Act 1982. This, of course, will ensure prisoners sentenced to less than five years' imprisonment for serious drug offences are not entitled to automatic release on parole at the end of their non-parole period.

I would like to take the opportunity to tell the house about the other measures the government has taken, since taking office only some eight months ago, to address other gaps in our justice system which are significant and worthy of mention here today. Firstly, as committed at the election, we said we would make legislative change for women to stay safe, and I am proud that the government has immediately taken action to do this. Whilst we are in the process of determining how to criminalise coercive control, with state and federal legislation about to be introduced, we are also working on the experience of domestic violence as a ground of discrimination in the Equal Opportunity Act.

We will also require those who are granted bail and charged with serious domestic violence offences to be electronically monitored as a condition of that bail. A legislative review is also being conducted on consent to sexual activity. These points of law are critical in the fight to keep our communities safe and in our ongoing effort to strengthen the fight against family violence.

We have already restored funding to the Women's Domestic Violence Court Assistance Service that was cut by the former government. This important service helps women with intervention order applications, variations and revocations, ending tenancies, and liaising with police to report breaches of intervention orders and other domestic violence issues.

Prevention is the key to our government's response to family violence, and we have committed $1 million in funding over three years to establish two domestic violence early intervention and recovery hubs in the north and south of Adelaide to support and empower women. We have enacted paid domestic violence leave for workers, pursuant to the Fair Work Act of South Australia.

We know that on average one woman a week dies from family violence in Australia. Hundreds of women in South Australia are affected, meaning thousands of families—women, children, young adults and men—are living in trauma. This investment is for the future of families, and for women who are failing to cope. We recently discovered that one in three South Australian women at work experience sexual harassment. Last financial year, the Working Women's Centre reported that 14 per cent of inquiries to the centre were about sexual harassment, and a further 38 per cent were about discrimination and sexual harassment combined.

Perpetrators via their employers have been allowed to carry on due largely to nondisclosure agreements which prevents naming and shaming. Early intervention, and instilling gender equality and respect for girls and women, is still at the forefront of what needs to occur. I suggest this needs to happen from birth, for both boys and girls, so that all are raised with equity and empowerment. An amount of $2 million over three years will go to the Working Women's Centre to help the service hire more lawyers who in turn help more women.

Attorney-General Kyam Maher in the other place is already on the record as saying this funding was really important and aligned with recommendations made by federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins, during her 2021 review. The Attorney-General made the point that women do not just suffer sexual harassment at work—which is bad enough—there is also underpayment of wages. So it is critically important that women have a resource like the Working Women's Centre.

Also vital is helping victims to get to court, and helping to support them generally. We provided $150,000 per annum for the Victim Support Service Court Companions; and the Victim Support Service: Safer Places—another $100,000 per annum initiative.

The tragedy of Carly Ryan, the first girl in Australia to be murdered by an online predator, in 2007, should still be resonating in this place. I met Carly's mother when we were on an inquiry and she has continued to pursue justice in that area. Together with Carly's mother, Sonya, and South Australia Police, the government has moved to strengthen Carly's Law, which makes it a criminal offence for a person over the age of 18 to misrepresent themselves to a child online in order to meet them.

Gone is the need to prove intent to harm the child. The misrepresentation of age and intent for an adult to meet a child is enough for police to protect our children and make an arrest. We are continuing to crack down on child sex offenders by closing loopholes. We are imposing bigger sentences and closing bail options.

With regard to the legislation before us today, while the amendments that are going to come into effect are minor—and I have spoken about part 2, part 3 and part 4 of the bill—they do have a significant impact. There are many more instances where our government has taken action in the justice area and we will continue to do so. But I will leave it for today to commend the Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio) Bill 2022 to the house.

Ms THOMPSON (Davenport) (12:40): I rise, too, to offer my support for the Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio) Bill 2022, presently before the house. This portfolio bill takes the most urgent of three sections from last year's Statutes Amendment (Attorney-General's Portfolio and Other Justice Measures) Bill to ensure that government and related legislation continues to operate as business as usual. The amendments address anomalies and other issues with the potential to cause confusion, inefficiency or impede process and improvements.

Part 2 of the bill amends the Bail Act 1985 to allow the courts more flexibility with prescribing the form of documents during the rollout of their Electronic Court Management System. Part 3 amends the Burial and Cremation Act 2013 to remedy an inconsistency with the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1996. It clarifies that while two death certificates are still required to issue a cremation permit, only one needs to be provided under section 36 of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act, with the second certificate to be in a form determined by the registrar.

Part 4 amends section 66 of the Correctional Services Act 1982 to remove an obsolete reference to a repealed definition of 'serious drug offence' in the Sentencing Act 2017 and reinserts the repealed definition into the Correctional Services Act 1982. This ensures prisoners sentenced to fewer than five years' imprisonment for a serious drug offence are not entitled to automatic release on parole at the end of the non-parole period; instead, parole will be at the discretion of the Parole Board.

The Malinauskas Labor government is committed to progressive reform and has a large agenda in the justice space. I am particularly proud to be part of a government that is committed to doing everything in our power to better support, protect and empower women affected by domestic violence. Restoring funding to the Women's Domestic Violence Court Assistance Service that was cut by the former government is an essential component of this effort.

This important service helps hundreds of women affected by domestic violence to access free legal advice and provides invaluable support by helping survivors of domestic and family violence secure the necessary legal protections against an abusive partner. Its services include assisting women to apply for intervention orders, report any breaches of an order and end tenancy agreements to help keep them safe.

By restoring this funding, the Malinauskas Labor government will ensure the service can continue and cope with growing demand, with around 800 women accessing the support each year. The investment also means the service can expand its focus to better support those in regional areas, as well as women from culturally diverse backgrounds who may face additional barriers in reporting abuse and seeking support.

In recent years, this service has helped to protect thousands of SA women and empowered them to escape abuse. We know just how important free, easily accessible legal advice is for those at risk. Our government is acting quickly to ensure these vital services can continue. The restoration of this funding is part of a suite of measures that we will progress to help prevent and end domestic violence and support those who experience it.

We are also currently in the final stages of implementing the Women's Legal Service to provide face-to-face legal advice and education to vulnerable women at risk of or experiencing domestic violence and family violence in the northern and southern regions. Services via videoconference are currently provided in those regions; however, due to the high proportion of family and domestic violence in these areas, there is rationale for targeting the region with face-to-face support, which is often much more impactful.

The Malinauskas Labor government is committed to enacting a range of legislative change, preventative actions and policies that help women stay safe. In line with our election commitments, we will soon be introducing legislation to criminalise coercive control. Across Australia, communities just like many here in our state are rightly calling for the criminalisation of coercive control and this reform will represent a major step forward in the need to address the horrendous prevalence of domestic violence.

We know that coercive control is overwhelmingly perpetrated against women by a current or former intimate partner and often precedes other forms of domestic violence. Those who experience it are dominated and controlled through intimidation, humiliation, exploitation, isolation and by removing their sense of self-worth. The controlling behaviour often includes threats and actual violence and, in some cases, tragically precedes murder.

We will be consulting with the domestic and family violence sector and our community to determine the most effective way to legislate against coercive control and how to educate service providers and our community and to teach people to recognise it when they see it and to ensure that perpetrators are brought to account for all acts of domestic violence.

Within this consultation period, we will be exploring the many aspects of community awareness, training and resourcing that are needed to support the implementation of future legislation. We are committed to hearing the voices of victim survivors, at-risk groups, women who live in regional areas, women from diverse cultural backgrounds and Aboriginal women as we move towards introducing legislation that will be introduced to the South Australian parliament in 2023.

There is still so much that we can do in this space. We intend to progress a range of legislative change and reforms. Yesterday, our Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence introduced legislation to provide up to 15 days of paid family and domestic violence leave. The proposed amendments to the Fair Work Act 1994 will support workers by ensuring they can immediately access paid leave for reasons including attending medical appointments, legal proceedings, counselling, relocation, the making of safety arrangements and other activities associated with the experience of family and domestic violence.

The legislation will apply to all workers in the state industrial relations system, which covers public sector and local government employees. South Australian private sector employees are covered by the commonwealth Fair Work Act 2009, which was recently amended to include paid family and domestic violence leave.

As family and domestic violence disproportionately impacts women, the proposed changes also promote gender equity by addressing some of the socio-economic impacts, such as loss of income and employment security. Fifteen days of paid family and domestic violence leave will set a national benchmark. People experiencing domestic violence should never need to make the choice between their financial security and independence and their safety. We will also be introducing legislation to:

include the experience of domestic violence as a ground for discrimination in the Equal Opportunity Act;

require those who were granted bail who have been charged with serious domestic violence offences to be electronically monitored as a condition of bail; and

review legislation pertaining to consent to sexual activity.

Our government is committed to working alongside service providers, women's organisations, women experiencing domestic violence and other stakeholders to use all possible levers to prevent and end domestic violence. I commend this bill to the house.

Ms SAVVAS (Newland) (12:48): I am very proud to be speaking to the statutes amendment bill today. Of course, there are lots of implications of this bill and it is varied in terms of its effect, but it is an important one with real implications for the criminal justice system and beyond.

There are five main components to the bill and, although the amendments are mostly technical, they will address anomalies and inefficiencies impeding the efficiency of justice across our state. I personally know all too well the importance of increasing efficiency in the courts, having interned and worked briefly at the Magistrates Court and seen firsthand the incredibly hard work put in by the Courts Administration Authority, both employees and volunteers.

Part 2 of our amendment will allow the courts more flexibility when prescribing the form of documents during the rollout of their Electronic Court Management System, a much-needed efficiency dividend when going through the onerous process of changing databases and systems. I would like to also acknowledge while we are here in the house today the staff at the Courts Administration Authority and all our courts across Australia, noting the necessary work that each and every one of them do in our justice system.

There are many other components to the bill, but part 4 amends section 66 of the Correctional Services Act, removing a reference to the repealed definition of a 'serious drug offence' in the Sentencing Act and reinserting it into the Correctional Services Act, ensuring that prisoners sentenced to less than five years are not entitled to automatic release on parole at the end of their non-parole period.

We know the impact that serious drug offences can have in our communities, in our families, and this amendment means that prisoners will not automatically be entitled to release on parole at the end of the non-parole period. This of course means that discretion will be determined by the Parole Board itself, giving greater oversight of those outcomes, rather than an automatic response.

The majority of these amendments are technical, but there are a variety of areas considered here relating to our wider agenda for justice reform. Personally, I am incredibly proud of the path we are paving relating to justice reform, particularly with respect to Aboriginal justice reform. I would like to acknowledge the tireless work of the Aboriginal affairs minister, our Attorney-General in the other place, for not only his work as a minister but over many years in this space as an advocate and a proud Aboriginal man.

We are of course implementing the Uluru Statement from the Heart and restarting the Treaty process with Aboriginal people. Providing an Aboriginal Voice to Parliament is much-needed reform and one we are undertaking with respectful consultation and consideration of Truth telling and Voice. I am incredibly proud to be part of a government taking real action in that space following on from the 2017 Uluru Statement from the Heart, which calls for definitive structural reform in the space of Aboriginal self-determination and representation.

We have already commenced work in that place with the inaugural Commissioner for First Nations Voice, spending the last three months engaging with our communities on the best way to provide a direct Voice to Parliament and better engage with our government. We are also legislating to protect and strengthen our Nunga Courts so that they have a formal and recognised place in our justice system; time willing, I do look forward to speaking to that at some stage later today.

There are a number of other pieces we are working on in this space, including increasing penalties on a range of child sex offences, providing funding for the Victim Support Service Court Companions and Victim Support Safer Places as well. We are also restoring funding to the work of the Women's Domestic Violence Court Assistance Service, and we are in the process of negotiating with both the Women's Legal Service and the Working Women's Centre to strengthen accessibility for women facing barriers in the justice system.

There is so much to do in the space of criminal justice and also in correctional reform, but we are making steps. Most recently, we have made commitments to the family of the late Sophia Naismith, who was tragically killed at the age of 15 when Sophia and her friend were hit by a Lamborghini. We have committed to dangerous driving reforms in response to that moving forward. I do wish to thank not just the Naismith family but all families for their courage in this space, particularly those facing the constraints and emotional turmoil of the criminal justice system and for continuing to advocate for change from personal experience. I commend the bill.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO (Light) (12:54): I rise to speak briefly on this bill. The bill is essentially one which falls in the broader justice portfolio and covers a number of areas. In fact, some of these proposals were submitted in the last parliament, and now they have been initiated and also carried forward in this parliament. The bill provides for the courts to have more flexibility in terms of the electronic management system. It also clarifies some issues around births, deaths and marriages in terms of death certificates and amends section 66 of the Correctional Services Act.

One of the things that motivated me to enter this place was the issue of justice and what we could do in the area of justice to improve the quality of people's lives. While predominantly I was motivated more by economic justice than other issues, certainly there are other forms of justice that also need to be addressed. This parliament has an obligation, I believe, not only to improve justice in our society through legislation but also to improve the existing arrangements to make sure they operate in a just way and to refine those systems when they are not doing so—in other words, removing barriers to justice. Justice is very important.

A number of other speakers have touched upon a whole range of areas this government is seeking to reform to ensure that a broader range of people can access the justice area. One of the areas that I believe needs improvement is consumer justice. Since its heyday in the Dunstan period, when this state led the nation in terms of consumer law reform, we have given over most of our powers to the federal government, the commonwealth, and I think the area of consumer justice has to improve. Consumer justice is in the hands of the ACCC at a national level, and the ACCC tends to be more interested in the big fish in the economic field, quite rightly.

I can understand that, but it does not take away from the fact that there are a lot of ordinary people hurting in our community because of injustices imposed upon them in the consumer area. I am sure I am no different from a lot of other members in this place who get a number of inquiries and representations made to them by constituents with complaints about retail and areas around building and airlines. Building and airline consumer justice issues is an area that has increased. Obviously, the building trade boom has led to a whole range of things happening. Secondly, the—

Mr TEAGUE: Point of order.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Brown): A point of order from the member for Heysen.

Mr TEAGUE: It is standing order 127 once again. It is not for members to sit and stew over matters. I again raise that, in the particular circumstances of the contribution, there is a clear digression from what is a very discrete subject matter. We have heard contributions that range over justice-connected, perhaps, observations. This is clearly a digression from anything related to the particular subject matter of the bill.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Brown): Member for Heysen, the member has not been speaking for very long and he is about to draw together the comments he has been making about the bill that is before us. I would remind members, however, that it is not appropriate for people to traverse the world, as it were, when talking about matters in bills. I would please ask members to stick to the bill before us, but there is nothing wrong with members talking about how the bill that is before us fits into a framework of policy, for example. With those words, I call on you, member for Light.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I do appreciate the interjection and the point of order by the member for Heysen because it gives me an opportunity to respond to some comments he made, which must have been in order because he made the comments—

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Brown): Member for Light, I would ask you just to continue with the bill. Let's not talk about things that were discussed earlier.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: We cannot talk about what we are talking about?

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Brown): I would ask you not to rehash debates that might have been had earlier today.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Well, it was actually part of this bill, Mr Acting Speaker.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Brown): While we are on the topic of mechanics, it might be a good time for you to seek leave to continue your remarks.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 12:59 to 14:00.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT