HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2023-06-01 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

Equal Opportunity (Domestic Abuse) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

Ms SAVVAS (Newland) (15:33): I am incredibly proud to be speaking to this bill today, as I always am when given the opportunity in this place to stand up for those experiencing domestic family violence and abuse. I have spoken in the house on multiple occasions not only about my own experience with domestic and family violence growing up but also about cycles and the cyclical nature of that abuse. We do know that without action cycles continue, and my family is but one example of how that cycle continued longer than it should have.

It is in fact the defence of women, particularly women and also children, who grew up in situations like I did with significant family and domestic violence that has given rise to my ability to be in this place in the first place. I think it is something so incredibly important to stand up for and stand up against, particularly for those of us with lived experience to speak out about our experiences to see betterment and change.

As we have heard earlier today in the criminal consolidation bill, speaking up is incredibly important. It is important to use our voices in this place, to acknowledge the real impacts of domestic violence on people across our state, and also the names and the faces of those people because using statistics is not enough. It is important to acknowledge the real lives and the real stories of people domestic and family violence and abuse affects.

I spoke on a previous bill with respect to domestic and family violence about my experience seeking accommodation support as a child. I thought I would share a sentence from a letter I received in response to speaking on that bill because it is one of the most important and special things that I have received. The letter said:

Dear Olivia,

Thank you for sharing your story and helping to further destigmatize this issue. The devastating truth is that family and domestic violence is all too common in our community. It occurs in all neighbourhoods and in all regions. That's why speaking up on this legislation is so critical—it will literally save lives.

I often think of that when I think of the role that we have as members of parliament and representatives of our community in this place. The role is not just to represent our communities: it is to stand up for our communities and stand up for those who may not have the ability to do so themselves.

We know that the statistics are incredibly high, particularly against women, knowing that one in four women has experienced intimate partner violence since the age of 15 and that one in four women has experienced emotional abuse by a current or former partner since the age of 15 as well. The statistics on domestic and family violence are even greater, particularly those effects on children which often are not in the statistics because those children do not have a voice of their own or the ability to report on those statistics.

This bill is incredibly important. It adds domestic abuse as a new protected attribute against discrimination and it does progress a key election commitment made by our government. It is part of a suite of policies on women's safety, equality and wellbeing, and on not just equality and wellbeing but also economic policies because we know that domestic violence and domestic abuse have significant economic impacts. In fact, those are the ones that often play a role in individuals being unable to leave circumstances and leave those abusers because of their economic circumstances and the situations at work that prevent them from doing so.

We are prioritising women's safety and empowerment in our government and the many different facets that come with that. Discrimination, particularly within the workplace, is another thing that needs proactive and thoughtful legislation. We know that domestic violence is not just a social issue. As I mentioned before, it is an economic issue, and the impacts on women, particularly women at work, are particularly significant.

We see the economic challenges for women facing domestic violence, and those barriers are significant to those wishing to escape from family and domestic violence situations. We want to ensure that those individuals do not have to choose between their safety and independence on the one hand and their economic security on the other. We know that economic security is probably the major barrier a lot of women do experience when making that decision about whether or not to leave. In particular, if they feel they will be discriminated against in their workplace, that may impact their choices as well.

Earlier this year, we passed a bill with respect to domestic violence leave further to the bill passed by the Albanese Labor government. That bill made it a criminal offence for an employer to disclose information obtained without the consent of the employee to whom the information relates. The leave that we were able to succeed with sends a clear message to the community, and to workers and their families, that the biggest employers in our state do not and will not tolerate domestic violence.

Prohibiting this level of discrimination in the workplace is just one more step towards achieving better equality and better outcomes, and allowing for greater economic security for those individuals experiencing domestic violence, particularly in their workplaces. The Attorney's office has worked very closely with the Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic And Family Violence in order to develop this bill. A large number of stakeholders were invited to comment on the bill throughout the consultation process.

The bill proposes to make it unlawful to treat someone unfavourably because they or their relative or associate have been subject to domestic abuse. I think it is really important to note here the inclusion of 'relative' and/or 'associate' because, of course, there are a lot of people who are often trying to assist or protect family members or dear friends, particularly in the workplace, knowing that those individuals often need support from those closest to them, so I do think that inclusion is a particularly important aspect of this bill.

This bill provides protections to prevent perpetrators of violence from disingenuously claiming to be the victim under the proposed legislation. We know that unfortunately that is all too common: people returning with a counter accusation or perhaps claiming they are the victims of the offence in order to rid themselves of the rightful shame they should have for perpetrating those acts in the first place.

This proposed legislation will also not prohibit employers from taking reasonable action in relation to an employee who is underperforming who is experiencing that abuse if there is a reasonable policy that applies equally to those employees in the first place. The bill will prohibit discrimination in all areas of public life covered by the Equal Opportunity Act, being employment or engagement in work, which does include unpaid work, and the provision of education, decisions of associations and qualifying bodies, and the provision of land, goods, services and accommodation.

A number of different scenarios come into play in consideration of this bill. For example, criticising or treating an employee differently because they made the decision or needed to take the time off for domestic violence leave, which is something that would indeed preclude a lot of people or make them feel that they were unable to take that leave in the first place—that would be the undue criticism or perhaps the stigma that that creates at work. It also prohibits scenarios such as refusing to rent a property to someone because they are protected under an IVO.

It is really important in terms of accessibility because there are also elements in this bill that mean you do not have to necessarily be pursuing criminal charges or have an IVO or have an individual who has been convicted of domestic violence related charges for this to apply. It is so important here to note the level of freedom that gives to victims who are experiencing domestic violence but for many reasons, whether it be reasons of safety—physical safety, emotional safety or economic safety—or whether it be for other reasons, such as not having enough evidence to pursue criminal charges or wanting to keep the family together to some degree. Those individuals will still be able to benefit from this bill and not be included within the parameters of the bill because they have not sought criminal reparations towards the person who has been abusive.

I think that that is really important. It is not often easy for individuals to seek those reparations against those who have been abusive, particularly in the case of those who have children. You hear time and time again stories of particularly women—but not always women—who do not want to take actions further because they do not want to broaden the stigma, or they want to keep a connection between the partner or the ex-partner and their children.

I have a lot of respect for those who make the decision not to pursue those charges, but I also would like to acknowledge that it is often difficult to get to that stage—difficult from an emotional perspective, difficult particularly if you have been suffering emotional abuse and you are unable to accept the ramifications or be aware of what is actually occurring to you in your relationship, and that is all too common. It is also difficult in terms of process. Being able to pursue those reparations is quite significant, and it does take an emotional toll and, for a lot of people, it retraumatises those individuals as well. I think that that is an incredibly important aspect of the bill, allowing individuals to be protected even if they have not sought those further actions or an intervention order against those individuals.

So I am incredibly proud of the work that we are doing as a government here. It is incredibly pleasing when you have discussions and we know that there are different things that we are doing all the time to make individuals feel safer and that they will be more protected under our government because the government are making a decision to intervene and to assist those individuals who are, unfortunately, still, in 2023, suffering from domestic violence and abuse. I am very happy to support this bill today.

Ms HUTCHESSON (Waite) (15:45): I rise in support of this bill. I would like to thank the Attorney-General and the Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence for all of the work that they have done. As an industrial advocate in my previous employment, I managed many cases where it was clear that discrimination was prevalent. I did manage cases sometimes where staff were trying to access domestic violence leave. It was an incredibly tricky topic: to protect them and their privacy but also make sure that they got their entitlement that they so desperately needed to access.

I managed a case where a member was in a relationship and was experiencing domestic violence. Her treatment from her immediate manager was incredibly poor. While she was up-front with her manager about what was happening, her manager ignored her cries for help. She proceeded to try to performance-manage the member and spoke about her situation with others, who included people she worked with. The behaviour was just appalling. The member had some small children and was effectively couch surfing to try to find a safe place to live. Whilst the employer in question touted themselves as being an employer of choice and one that often announced publicly their support and their policies on domestic violence, underneath there was this discrimination and bullying.

I am glad to be here today to talk about a bill that will prohibit criticising or otherwise treating an employee poorly because they have taken time off to take domestic violence leave. The bill proposes to make it unlawful to treat someone unfavourably, which is just absolutely what is necessary because if they or a relative or an associate have been subjected to domestic abuse, then they need to be treated with care, not with discrimination.

No-one should have to live in an abusive relationship, whether it is physical, emotional or financial, or experience coercive controlling behaviours. The bill amends the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 to add domestic abuse as a new protected attribute against discrimination. People experiencing domestic or family violence need every support they can get, and establishing the experience of domestic abuse as a ground protected under the antidiscrimination laws is an important first step in helping them break free from these abusive relationships.

Under the Equal Opportunity Act, someone is found to be treated unfavourably based on an attribute if they are treated less favourably than someone else in similar circumstances without the relevant attribute. When my member was ready to return to the workplace, she was asked within a few weeks why she was not performing, having been on leave for nearly six months. If someone had returned from sick leave or long service leave they would not have been treated this way, and I am glad this bill will add protections for workers going forward.

The bill also seeks to protect people in their public life, in all areas covered by the Equal Opportunity Act: employment or engagement in work, including unpaid work (volunteering); the provision of education; decisions of associations and qualifying bodies; and the provision of land, goods, services and, of course, accommodation.

Refusing to rent a property to a victim of domestic abuse if they are protected under an intervention order will become illegal. Where a survivor has been living in crisis accommodation or couch surfing, as my member had been, or staying with family, they may not be able to provide what would be deemed a stable rental history. The bill prohibits indirect discrimination. This form of discrimination is found to occur when a general requirement is imposed that persons with a protected attribute (in this case, subject to domestic violence) cannot comply with or will find more difficult to comply with (in this case, stable rental history).

Mr Speaker, I have recently been watching an incredibly emotive series called Maid. I am not sure if you have seen it. There were a lot of tears when watching it. Whilst I have not been a victim of domestic violence, there were some things in there that really spoke around warning signs, that things can escalate quickly. It is a very confronting story of a domestic violence abuse survivor. There is a point where the survivor is searching for accommodation for her and her baby. They left the house with nothing. They are on welfare and are turned away from house after house, as the rental assistance they have been provided with was not something many landlords wanted to accept. Whilst this is a fictitious story, one can perceive her experiences will not be uncommon. I am glad that this bill seeks to right those wrongs.

Putting stories like these on the TV allows people to really take a second look at what domestic violence survivors actually go through and the battle that they have to even leave the relationship and the number of times they may go back to the relationship, thinking things will only get better, only to find out that they again end up in a similar situation and then the shame they feel for doing it and for going back. It was clearly demonstrated in this film. I know that that definitely would be something that people deal with when they are trying to escape the situation. I think it is good that these stories are on the TV and on the movies so that we can talk about domestic violence more and we can do what we must to try to stop it from happening.

This bill also contains a power for the equal opportunity commissioner to decline to take action on a complaint of domestic abuse discrimination if there is insufficient evidence that the complainant was subject to domestic abuse. What we sometimes see is perpetrators, in order to get out of the stigma of being a perpetrator or trying to get their partner back or just trying to avoid prosecution, say that they, too, are a victim of domestic abuse. The commissioner will be able to make sure that the evidence that is provided is sufficient, that it is clear that domestic abuse has occurred.

It is sad that this is something that happens. Sometimes they may not even think that what they are doing is abuse until it is really given to them and then turn around and pretend that they are the victim. In this case, the bill will protect the actual victim. It gives a clear basis for the commissioner to screen out these complaints in addition to her existing powers to decline to take action on complaints that are frivolous, vexatious or lacking in substance. The disingenuous complainant will then be unable to access assistance or conciliation through the commissioner, so there will be no course for them past that, although they will be able to access SACAT if they feel that they have that right.

The requirement for providing sufficient evidence does not seek to place additional difficulties and burdens on the victims of abuse, however. The bill intentionally provides a broad definition of what can constitute evidence of abuse, including an intervention order, medical records or evidence of seeking or obtaining assistance from a charitable organisation that will protect them if they are not ready to go to police but they have sought some help. This bill will cover them.

Our government is doing all it can to help prevent and end domestic violence and help rebuild the lives of survivors. This legislation will ensure that those who face discrimination for experiencing domestic violence can access support and an avenue for recourse through the Equal Opportunity Commission. I commend the bill to the house.

The Hon. A. MICHAELS (Enfield—Minister for Small and Family Business, Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs, Minister for Arts) (15:52): I rise today to speak on the Equal Opportunity (Domestic Abuse) Amendment Bill and commend it to the house. This amendment bill is a really important step in addressing the issue of domestic abuse in South Australia. The amendments we are looking at seek to protect and support victims of domestic abuse through the improvement of existing laws and, in particular, amends the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 to prohibit discrimination in all areas of public life covered by the act. That includes employment or engagement in work (including unpaid work), the provision of education, decisions of association and qualifying bodies, and the provision of land, goods and services and accommodation.

Specifically, this bill would further define domestic abuse as a form of discrimination. As such, it will be illegal to discriminate against someone or their relative or associate who has been or is being subject to domestic abuse. For example, the bill will prohibit criticising or treating an employee unfairly due to taking domestic violence leave for refusing to rent a property to someone simply because they are protected under an intervention order.

It covers abuse in a wide range of relationships, as specified under the intervention orders legislation—for example, relationships including spouses, intimate partners, family members and carers. The bill will also prohibit both direct and indirect discrimination. Indirect discrimination in this instance would occur when a general requirement is imposed on a victim of domestic abuse which may be difficult for them to comply with or which they find more difficult to comply with than others.

An example in my portfolio area is an application that requires proof of recent rental history. This type of requirement is usually imposed on all applicants. However, a domestic violence victim may be unable to comply because they have been residing in crisis accommodation or have an unstable rental history with many short-term tenancies. Indirect discrimination would be unlawful if the requirement is not reasonable in the circumstances of the case.

As the Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs, I have been working hard with my team to standardise rental application forms in an attempt to discourage discrimination of any kind but particularly including domestic abuse discrimination. This change proposes to reduce the amount of information a prospective tenant can be asked to provide in a rental application, relieving some of the administrative burden involved and protecting the privacy of prospective tenants where information is not reasonably necessary. Prohibiting the disclosure of certain information will also help reduce opportunities for discrimination to occur in the tenant selection process.

This amendment bill would have significant practical implications. Victims of domestic abuse would be able to access greater legal protections and support as well as be provided with a much-needed safety net for victims, who often feel vulnerable and isolated. These amendments also provide protections to prevent perpetrators of violence from disingenuously claiming to be a victim. Not only is evidence, such as an intervention order or medical records, required but the equal opportunity commissioner will also have the power not to review claims that do lack evidence or seem disingenuous.

Further, these amendments will not prohibit employers from taking reasonable action in relation to an employee who is underperforming if it is in accordance with fair and reasonable policies. According to a study by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, one in six women and one in nine men have experienced physical or sexual violence by a current or former partner since the age of 15, and it is very important that we do not forget the emotional and psychological abuse in the form of coercive control.

The Malinauskas government—and I want to thank the Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence—has been working tirelessly in progressing policies on women's safety, quality and wellbeing as a key election commitment. Earlier this year, we passed legislation to amend the Fair Work Act to assist domestic violence victims by increasing family and domestic violence leave.

This is instrumental in protecting victims of abuse and an important safeguard to ensure that anyone attempting to escape family and domestic abuse situations does not have to choose between their safety and their independence or being able to go to work for their financial security. If they need time off work, they should be entitled to it. This legislation ensures any worker accessing these leave entitlements would not suffer any financial disadvantage or discrimination for choosing to do so.

The bill before us today further builds on this foundation and strengthens our stance in combating and protecting victims of domestic abuse. We also granted a significant increase in the funding to an organisation that is quite dear to my heart: Catherine House. It is an amazing not-for-profit organisation that provides significant support for domestic abuse victims. Catherine House offers safe and secure short-term accommodation for women who are escaping domestic abuse.

They also offer outreach support for women who are experiencing domestic abuse but do not need or cannot access emergency accommodation. They provide support services such as case management, where each woman is assigned a support worker who assists them in assessing their needs and develops a tailored service plan to help them. They also help women access legal and other services as required. Particularly with the legal advice, I want to thank those firms that offer pro bono support to Catherine House. They can also provide counselling and advocacy, offering counselling support to residents and nonresidents who are affected by domestic abuse and other issues.

Catherine House's mission is to support women not only to secure safe and sustainable housing but also to build their skills and confidence, improve their health and wellbeing, and achieve their personal goals. What is really important in what they do is offer a range of educational and training programs, including help with financial literacy, computer skills and job-readiness training. I have been a long-time supporter of Catherine House, and I want to thank the staff for the incredible work they do.

At its core, the Equal Opportunity (Domestic Abuse) Amendment Bill is about ensuring that victims of domestic abuse are treated with dignity and respect and given the support they deserve. It is about providing practical solutions to the complex and often overwhelming challenges that victims of domestic abuse face.

The legislation before the house today only complements the amazing work that is already being done to combat domestic abuse issues and support victims. This bill is about sending a clear message that domestic abuse is not acceptable. It is about making it clear that we will not tolerate violence or discrimination against anyone and that we will take every step necessary to protect the most vulnerable members of our community.

Again, I want to thank the Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence, our Attorney-General and the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity for their collaboration in the development of this bill. I also want to acknowledge the support and comments from over 20 stakeholders during the bill's consultation process. Their collective commitment to the protection of victims of domestic abuse is admirable and I appreciate all their efforts.

This is a bill we hope will never be needed—but of course it is desperately needed. That is why I commend this bill to the house.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI (Unley) (16:01): I would like to make a contribution on this bill as well because it is a very complex issue and, as an employer, I had a situation with one of my staff where I got quite involved in supporting that person in the domestic violence situation they were in with a relationship; it was the first time I had experienced it—the way they were treated, such awful treatment from someone who claimed to love someone else, .

I will not go into details, but it is fair to say that I welcome these laws because they make it very clear that there is a social responsibility on us as a community. That is in complete contrast to what the view was about domestic violence 50 years ago, when people would say, 'That's between him and her. That's their business to work out.' That was just an easy way out. Over the years, culture has changed, but it is important we call out any culture that supports the coercion of women or domestic violence as part of that culture, calling it out and saying that it is not acceptable, regardless of your culture.

We had that culture in Western culture. Women had to give up their jobs when they were married. My mother was married at 18½; she started in the workforce at age 14 and by 18½ she was done because she had married. That was a double whammy because one of the tools women need to leave domestic violence situations is financial security. How were they to gain financial security if the culture prevented them from working? The law allowed that, and women were paid different rates of pay back then as well. Again, that was cultural, and it took legislation in the parliament to correct it.

This legislation will go a long way to correcting any misconceptions people have out there regarding victims of domestic violence. For example, how many times do we hear the excuse, 'She asked for it. Have you heard the way she talks to him?' or, 'Look at the way she spends his money,' or, 'Look at what she's wearing,' or, 'Look at the way she keeps that house.' How many times have you heard people try to justify a man's action of domestic violence with those ignorant lines that I have just read out?

It is still a stigma. I witnessed with my own employee how difficult it was for that employee to start that conversation with me and she really felt she had no choice when she turned up late for work one morning with a black eye.

This piece of legislation, of course, is one of many changes in new legislation to be brought to this parliament in the last five years. If you recall, then attorney-general Vickie Chapman brought a bill to this place that enabled women who may have had some concerns about their new partner's violent past to contact the authorities and get a report card, if you like, that was specific to what was considered to be red flags for somebody entering a relationship. It was a very progressive policy and was supported by women, in particular, and taken up. There was an article in the paper not that long ago about how often it has been used.

Of course, we also have a brand-new act of parliament to specifically identify the strangling of somebody as an offence and, 20 years after every other state had done it, the removal of the gay panic defence as well. What was important about that legislation was that it still gave women a window to move out of a violent situation in extraordinary circumstances. There was always an excuse for removing the gay panic defence from those who for some reason were opposed to it, arguing that it could make it more difficult for a woman to protect herself or respond to a very violent relationship that she might be in, but that was dealt with in the changes to the gay panic defence.

I am not sure whether the minister can clarify this in her response, but I am also interested in whether this has an effect on forced marriage—people who may be in a forced marriage situation or in fear of a forced marriage and people, particularly women of course, who may be in a culture that is coercive when it comes to their social lives, such as adult women who might still be living at home with their parents constraining what they are able to do either for a living or in their own time or who they can see, for example. What if they are going through that sort of a situation? I ask if the minister is able to clarify that in her response. I would be very interested in the answer.

I agree with previous speakers that it is still a stigma for those who are victims of domestic violence, and it should not be a stigma. It is not a stigma for someone who may have been involved in a random act of violence in the street or have been in a building where an armed robbery occurred or have been the victim of a reckless driver. There is no stigma there, so why is there a stigma for those women who are victims of domestic violence? We still have a long way to go.

This morning, I saw on a bus stop a very good advertisement. It was a photograph of a young man with a line on it that said, 'I don't like it when she goes out without me.' That is coercion. I think that is a very strong message, because you do see that, and you do witness that, and you say to yourself, 'What on earth is going on here? I hope she gets out of that relationship because that is not going to end well.'

I think we need young women and their families to understand that, when they identify that, it is a concern and is simply not acceptable. A couple are still two individuals and a healthy relationship is a relationship based on trust. If you cannot trust a partner, forcing yourself on that partner or forcing your views on that partner or forcing rules of the relationship on that partner is simply not the answer in a relationship.

I am not sure whether there is some plan that we will see after the legislation becomes an act of parliament, signed off by the Governor and proclaimed. Certainly, I think it is important for industry organisations, including the Real Estate Institute, Business SA and others, to have a clear understanding of what the expectation is and that these are new rules.

I know from my own personal experience that it will be the exception for many small businesses in particular to have to rely on the law in order to take an interest and support somebody who is in that situation, but it is important that every employer knows and every landlord knows what the law is and why it is there, because it is all about changing culture. Sometimes the parliament is ahead of the public; other times, the parliament is behind the public approval, or social licence is gained for that change many years before the change is implemented by the parliament.

Congratulations to the minister on bringing this bill to the house. I am certainly very pleased that we are seeing a much more progressive agenda under this government on social issues than what we saw under the 16 years of the previous Labor government with attorneys-general such as Michael Atkinson and John Rau, who were extremely conservative. I know that this has been driven by key progressive members of the Labor Party. Congratulations on bringing this to the parliament.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence, Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing) (16:12): I rise to close this second reading debate. In doing so, I want to wholeheartedly thank all the members who have contributed for sharing their thoughts, their views and also for what was inherent in all of their words: their shared determination to help drive change that makes a real, sustainable difference in the lives of those who experience domestic violence. I will come back to the member for Unley's question later in my remarks.

I will make some broader comments first. This legislation is part of a very strong, comprehensive legislative policy, community awareness-raising agenda around the prevention and eradication of domestic violence. This legislation has been very long in the making and it is now a giant step closer to becoming law, hopefully not too far away at all—a law that will ensure that victim survivors are heard when they experience discrimination, that acts on their wishes, a law that supports their ability to access and sustain employment, education, services and suitable accommodation provision.

I am really proud to be part of a government that supports and empowers victim survivors of domestic violence. As I said, this commitment to doing so was shown through all the members' speeches. It was shown through the member for Elder's contribution, who reflected on her time working with the excellent women at Women's Safety Services and the importance, as she notes, that this simple bill will have on the lives of victim survivors. I thank the member for Adelaide for her contribution and for sharing a really important story about a woman who attended her electorate office, a woman who had experienced domestic violence and whom her office rightly assisted to reconnect to community life upon leaving that relationship.

Many members through their electorate offices, through involvement in their communities and through personal connections, of course, often meet women experiencing domestic violence. Many women, as I spoke to in my second reading explanation, have examples of when they have faced circumstances of discrimination that they have shared with various members of parliament. The member for Newland spoke really courageously to the cyclical nature of domestic abuse, to her own experience, and so rightly about the importance of speaking up and about the importance of empowering the voices of others.

I thank the member for Waite for speaking to the importance of this reform for employees. I thank the member for King, who is a passionate advocate in this area, the member for Davenport, the member for Hurtle Vale and the member for Enfield. I also thank the member for Unley for his contribution. I was very pleased to hear the member for Unley's support of this bill and also that he noticed our See the Signs campaign on a bus stop, perhaps on Goodwood Road, possibly this morning. I know there is one—

The Hon. D.G. Pisoni: King William.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: That's very good—very nice. There is another one there. I think from what I heard the member for Unley has noticed our advertisement, which is a part of our See the Signs campaign. A couple of months ago, in the middle of March, we hosted here in Adelaide Sue and Lloyd Clarke, the incredibly courageous parents and grandparents of Hannah Clarke and her three beautiful children who were murdered by her ex-partner.

On that evening, we launched that ad campaign. I must say that since it has been running on social media in a way that is very much targeted particularly to a younger audience, and since it has also been on bus stops and tram stops etc., we have had a remarkable response in terms of people noticing it, and in terms of people saying things similar to what the member for Unley just said, that is, that the messages are very clear. They are young people talking in their language, I guess, articulating what coercive control and domestic abuse look like.

There is the advertisement that the member for Unley spoke about, which is a young man speaking. There is also a version where a young woman is speaking about her experience of domestic abuse and being controlled, so I am very pleased to hear that the member for Unley has seen that really important advertisement. We intend to continue that campaign right up to and beyond the point when we introduce legislation to criminalise coercive control.

As I have spoken about in this house, we are currently consulting in a very targeted way with particular groups on that legislation, and I so much look forward, when that consultation concludes, to that bill being in this house. To answer the member for Unley's question, potentially about forced marriage etc., and particular circumstances that may arise in the course of those relationships, I think there is an opportunity in that legislation to consider that particular issue, and it is certainly something that we can look at in a more fulsome way.

In terms of this legislation, it may, in particular circumstances, touch on that issue in the way that this legislation is applied, but this legislation is very much focused on when a person experiences domestic violence and experiences discrimination as a result of that experience in the course of their employment, in the course of their education and in the course of their seeking particular services or accommodation.

Previously, prior to this legislation, should they experience discrimination as a result of that experience of domestic violence, there was no recourse for the equal opportunity commissioner to hear that particular complaint. This legislation fixes that. In response to your question, I think the coercive control legislation will provide us an opportunity to explore that particular issue and those issues around coercive controlling behaviour that might arise through those particular circumstances. So, again, I thank you for that question.

As I said, I really do thank all members who have contributed to this debate. I absolutely thank the Attorney-General and the equal opportunity commissioner for working closely with me, and indeed the Office for Women also, to progress this legislation. I again take the opportunity to acknowledge the extraordinary and courageous advocacy of a number of people in the lead-up to the passage of this bill—brave women, victim survivors who shared their stories. I also acknowledge domestic violence service providers, advocacy organisations, unions, the Working Women's Centre and others who have advocated alongside me for some time for this change. I am really pleased that today we progress it.

I also acknowledge Elliette from the Attorney-General's office, Hilary from my office, and Lara and others from the Attorney-General's Department who have also worked toward this. I am so pleased that this bill finally progresses, and I commend the bill to the house.

Bill read a second time.

Third Reading

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence, Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing) (16:21): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

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