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

Criminal Law Consolidation (Child Sexual Abuse) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Debate resumed.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (11:39): I rise to indicate the opposition's support for the bill and, as lead speaker for the opposition, will make some brief remarks. Other than to emphasise the words of the minister just now, I, too, recognise the presence of Grace Tame here today in the chamber. It is well that we recognise the particular relevance of Grace Tame's presence here today because it is not every day that legislation comes to parliaments around the country, the result of such singular work by one individual.

We know that the advocacy of Grace Tame as Australian of the Year in 2021 was of particular importance in a whole range of ways. Here we are now some distance from that time and legislating to continue to ensure that language is appropriately adopted further to make clear that the sexual abuse of a child is properly described and that there is not the occasion, either in the public imagination or in terms of Grace Tame's own experience, or the possibility for there to be some endeavour to mischaracterise child sexual abuse is something other than that. The minister has reflected on the particular remarks of that perpetrator of offences against Grace Tame in 2011.

I otherwise remind the house that section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act remains, as it was and as it will continue to be, among the most serious offences in the criminal law. We know that sexual abuse of a child carries a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life. It is offending of the most serious kind and it is appropriate that, in describing that offending, it is described as what it is. I, too, would quote Grace Tame, in relation to both the offence and the importance of language in the context of the offence, and it has been observed just now. Grace Tame said:

Our legislation must reflect the unequivocal seriousness of this crime, which is never a child's desire, but instead a perverted fantasy projected onto and into them through a process of grooming which involves a stratagem of calculated—often invisible—offences designed to gradually increase a pre-existing stark power imbalance.

Let there be more strength to your advocacy work, Grace Tame, and let us in our work as legislators ensure that we do all that we can to continue to steer those rules that apply both in terms of offences and penalties and in terms of the culture, the public discourse and the use of language that surround them. So I once again commend the bill, recognising in particular the work of the former Australian of the Year towards that end and I look forward to its speedy passage.

Mrs PEARCE (King) (11:44): I, too, rise to speak in support of the Criminal Law Consolidation (Child Sexual Abuse) Amendment Bill. I am passionate about doing what we can to make our state better, fairer and more equitable for all. Often, to be able to create meaningful change we have to face hard truths. In today's case, we must acknowledge that there are predators out there who will exploit the most vulnerable and that we have seen some cases where there have not been adequate provisions to take power away from them. To be able to address this, we need to raise public awareness and implement effective laws and policies that will help to prevent abuse, and, as always, language matters.

I would like to thank Grace Tame for all of the work she has put into the prevention and awareness of child sexual abuse, having used her story to push for much-needed reforms to raise awareness about the impacts of sexual violence. All of us in this place face public scrutiny every day—it is part of public life. But, unlike Grace, we do not have to live through our trauma daily to be able to create change.

It is an incredibly powerful way to make a difference, as it is empowering to help others to feel seen, heard and recognised. But I would also like to acknowledge that it would be a heavy burden. From the bottom of my heart: thank you. I recognise your heavy load and you inspire me to be more open about the experiences I have had in my life to advocate for progressive change. The impact you have already had on the nation is significant.

When I first heard your story, it made me reflect on my early years in high school, in a small country town, and how I wish I knew more then. It is not my place to put another story on public record and I will not, but what I will say is I wish I knew where I could have gone to seek advice on what at the time was thought to be a salacious rumour and I wish some of the attitudes towards that rumour were starkly different. Essentially, I wish there was more public awareness on predatory behaviours and abuse and how to tackle it.

But the actions taken by people like Grace have helped ensure change for the next generation. I am a mother of two and I take great comfort in knowing that both my daughter and son are learning about consent. My daughter is as fierce as she is fearless and I would not want anybody to diminish her flame. In fact, I want both my children to feel empowered and safe to be who they are, as I would wish that on any child. I am pleased that, through a growing awareness across our nation, we are better protecting our children.

I will add that I was also pleased that their school chose to celebrate International Women's Day some years ago by watching a presentation from Grace. I will have it noted that it was the high school and not the primary side of the school, but to be there and see not just students learning about grooming, consent and sexual abuse but to have the parents as well was monumental in helping to raise awareness and be a catalyst for change. It is a hard truth, but one that we must all face, and I thank people like Grace who have championed this and led the way.

I am pleased that the Attorney-General met with Grace earlier this year to discuss the foundation's Harmony Campaign, which is calling on jurisdictions to harmonise laws that apply to sexual assault. At the moment, around Australia, there are multiple definitions for all things ranging from sexual intercourse, the age of consent, consent and grooming, as well as different sets of punishments for those different offences. The foundation acknowledges how big an ask it is to see all Australian states and territories update and harmonise their legislation and therefore, for the moment, the foundation requests three changes as a starting point.

Request number one brings us all here today to this very bill. Currently in South Australia, section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 provides that an adult who maintains an unlawful sexual relationship with a child is guilty of an offence, which provides for a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life. Let us be clear: the behaviour of an adult preying on a child is not a relationship. It is abuse and it is a crime.

With Queensland and the ACT recently changing the headings of their offences and the Northern Territory having introduced a bill that will change the headings of their offences, it is also time that we here in South Australia do the same so that the words we use in our legislation reflect the true nature of the offence and that we use words that will not diminish the gravity of them.

As I have mentioned, words matter, and the use of a word like 'relationship' in this context implies a sense of mutual responsibility, consent, and it diminishes the gravity of the offence. This bill will amend section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 to 'sexual abuse of a child'. This bill will also insert subsection (14) into section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act to disapply the Legislation Interpretation Act 2021 to provide that the heading does not form part of the section and that, with this amendment, there is no intention for the new heading to affect the interpretation or operation of the offence.

Prior to 2017, section 50 of the act was 'persistent sexual exploitation of a child' and was designed so that an offender could be found guilty as long as the jury was satisfied the offence was committed against the child over a period of not less than three days. In 2017, however, the High Court delivered a significant judgement in two appeals, being Hamra v The Queen and Chiro v The Queen. In Chiro, the majority said that upon a finding of guilt the jury would be asked by the judge which of all the sexual acts alleged they had proven beyond reasonable doubt, and then the judge had to sentence taking these into account.

If the jury is not asked that question, the judge must sentence on the version of the facts most favourable to the offender; that is, taking into account the two least serious acts. In light of this, section 50 was amended at the time to introduce the relationship offence titled 'persistent sexual abuse of a child', which was based on a model provision recommended by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse where the relationship offence removes the requirement to provide particular offences to establish the persistent offences.

Later in 2021, the DPP raised concerns that the heading was no longer appropriate as the 'persistent' sexual abuse of a child is no longer an element of the offence, with concerns raised that the language of 'persistent' in the section heading could give rise to an argument that the word must have some work to do in interpreting the provision.

This brings us to today's amendment, which we have made clear does not change the elements of the offence, and maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship will remain an element of the offence in line with those recommendations made by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in 2017, and remains consistent with similar offences in other jurisdictions around Australia, such as in Queensland, the ACT, New South Wales and in Tasmania.

To harmonise law regarding offences such as these between all states, territories and the federal government is a monumental task, and it is a task that deserves our utmost attention to ensure that it is reviewed and acted on appropriately. This is why South Australia is engaging with the commonwealth government as part of a broader review into sexual consent and abuse laws. The changing language in our legislation is not about a mere swapping of words in and out; it is bigger than that, because words have the power to either empower or disempower those who need the full support of the system.

When we soften the words we use, we do not capture that gravity. We must correct the record to take power away from abusers who for too long have 'sought solace in our systems and institutions that shield them from the full extent of what they've done'. We are working to ensure that with this bill here before us today we are starting to correct the record and ensure that our words and actions in this place provide protection to survivors while taking away power that for too long has been abused by offenders.

S.E. ANDREWS (Gibson) (11:53): I rise to indicate my support for a straightforward but such important change to the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935. I would like to acknowledge Grace Tame in the gallery today and thank you for your strength and to acknowledge that, in your presence here today and in listening to our words, I hope you feel a sense of pride for all that you are achieving, but I also acknowledge how difficult it must be to sit here.

Sex with a child is not only unlawful, it is abuse, child sexual abuse, and we must give it that name. Language matters. It is never a relationship; it is an abuse of power. It reminds me of domestic violence headlines that still exist today: 'Fun-loving dad kills his wife', 'Good-hearted man murders his children'. They are not good-hearted men, they are not fun-loving men: they are murderers. The impact of child sexual abuse is immeasurable and most often something that the victim will keep secret for many years due to the violation and shame that come as a result of the abuse.

I note that in March, our Attorney-General Kyam Maher MLC met with former Australian of the Year and sexual abuse survivor, Grace Tame, to discuss her foundation's Harmony Campaign, which calls on jurisdictions to harmonise laws that pertain to sexual assault. Grace Tame has made it clear to us all that the word 'relationship' implies mutual responsibility, consent and entirely diminishes the gravity of the offence. A child who is sexually assaulted is never able to provide consent.

One of the areas in which harmonisation is sought by the campaign is in the language used to describe child sexual offences. In South Australia, section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 provides: 'An adult who maintains an unlawful sexual relationship with a child is guilty of an offence.' The maximum penalty for this offence is imprisonment for life.

In Western Australia, New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania, the relevant child sexual offences have headings that use the term 'Persistent sexual abuse of a child'. In South Australia, Queensland, the ACT and Northern Territory, the headings for the relevant offences refer or referred to a 'relationship with a child'. Queensland and the ACT have recently changed these headings of their offences, and the Northern Territory has recently introduced a bill that would change the heading of the relevant offence.

The bill does not change the elements of the offence, and maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship will still be an element of the offence as recommended by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. However, the offence will be renamed to more appropriately and properly reflect the lack of consent, and reinforce the absolute gravity of the offence.

A broader review of sexual consent and abuse laws, that includes other issues raised by the Grace Tame Foundation's Harmony Campaign, is currently being undertaken by South Australian and federal governments. This includes a singular age of consent, its relevant provisions and punishments being agreed upon and adopted by all states and territories, a singular definition of the physical act of sexual intercourse being agreed upon by all states and territories, and the development and implementation of uniform grooming legislation.

I would like to thank the member for King for her words, acknowledging high school experiences. I wish I, too, had the words. I give my strength and respect to all those who speak out, and my heart to all those who cannot.

I would like to acknowledge Grace Tame for her work and advocacy, and thank every child sexual abuse survivor who has had the courage to speak out. For those who find themselves unable to speak, your voice is valued. You are heard. In fact, I am reading your book right now and I have learnt so much, and I thank you. In fact, when I read it I devour it, and then I put it down for a few days. It takes some reflection and some time to take in. I would like you to know that with your tireless advocacy you are making a world of difference to so many. Please know that every time someone criticises you, I make a donation to the Grace Tame Foundation. I commend this bill to the house.

Ms THOMPSON (Davenport) (11:58): One in five children experiences sexual abuse. For a long time, I have admired the courage of Ms Grace Tame and her efforts to passionately advocate for survivors of child sexual abuse and systemic change to prevent child sexual abuse and so, particularly given she is joining us here in the chamber today, I am so proud to be able to stand and speak briefly on this extremely important bill.

As we have heard from some of the other speakers today, and I certainly echo many of their comments, in March this year our Attorney-General, Kyam Maher, met with Ms Tame to discuss her foundation, Harmony Campaign, which calls on the jurisdictions right across our country to harmonise laws that pertain to sexual assault.

One of the areas in which harmonisation is sought by the campaign is in the language used to describe the child sexual offences. Currently, in South Australia section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 provides that an adult who maintains 'an unlawful sexual relationship with a child' is guilty of an offence. The maximum penalty for this offence is imprisonment for life. I know there are many people in my community who believe that that is just not enough.

At the crux of Ms Tame's concerns is that the word 'relationship' implies mutual responsibility and consent and diminishes the gravity of the offence. In response to Ms Tame's advocacy, the government has introduced the Criminal Law Consolidation (Child Sex Abuse) Amendment Bill to change the heading of section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act, from 'Unlawful sexual relationship with a child' to 'Sexual abuse of a child'.

There is no place for the word 'relationship' on matters of sexual abuse. No child can consent to a sexual relationship with an adult. The existing language does not reflect the gravity of the crime and, as Ms Tame tells us, it feeds into victim blaming attitudes and gives licence to characterise abuse as romance. Ugh. It has no place in the Criminal Law Consolidation Act in South Australia or in any state in this country.

The changing of the language in this offence in South Australia is an important step in ensuring that the offence name accurately reflects the nature of the conduct and also achieves a change in how these offences will be reported without impacting on the existing operation. The new heading that we are proposing in the Criminal Law Consolidation Act, 'Sexual abuse of a child', appropriately reflects the gravity of the offence—which is entirely exploitative and predatory in nature—and also seeks to change how such offences might be reported on in the media, adding to the awareness of child sexual abuse and bringing accountability and transparency to these vile acts.

A broader review of sexual consent and abuse laws that includes other issues raised by Ms Tame and her foundation, Harmony Campaign, is pleasingly currently being undertaken by the South Australian and federal governments. I am looking forward to being able to discuss more of those matters here in this parliament. The Harmony Campaign is also advocating for changes to see a singular age of consent, its relevant provisions and punishments be agreed upon and adopted by all states and territories. The campaign believes that the glaring discrepancies between these trivialise and confuse the issue and are often exploited by perpetrators.

The campaign also advocates for a singular definition of the physical act of sexual intercourse to be agreed upon by all states and territories. Quite rightly, it is the belief of the foundation and the Harmony Campaign that if the nation achieves consistent sexual assault legislation we will be better equipped to prevent and respond to the issue and more able to better protect survivors and deter perpetrators.

I would like to thank Ms Tame and the many advocates who have relentlessly and courageously advocated for change in awareness of child sexual abuse over many decades. I particularly thank the brave victim survivors who are able to use their painful stories to raise awareness and to ensure that other children are not subjected to this type of repulsive abuse and abuse of power.

While a technically simple change in this bill, it is an extremely important one in its recognition of the advocacy of Ms Grace Tame and the Harmony Campaign that language matters. We cannot give perpetrators of child sexual abuse a licence to characterise this abuse in any way as consensual. Ms Tame tells us that the legislation must reflect the seriousness of the crime, and so sexual abuse of a child will no longer be referred to as an 'unlawful relationship' in South Australia's Criminal Code. It will be labelled for what it is: sexual abuse of a child. The changing of the language of this offence in South Australia makes sure that the offence accurately reflects the nature of the offence and gives victim survivors the dignity and respect that they deserve. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr ODENWALDER: Mr Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the house.

A quorum having been formed:

Ms CLANCY (Elder) (12:05): I rise today in support of the Criminal Law Consolidation (Child Sexual Abuse) Amendment Bill 2023 to amend the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935. This amendment, although short and relatively straightforward, is significant and it is truly powerful.

Section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act currently reads, 'Unlawful sexual relationship with child'. Successful passage of this bill before us today would amend this section to read, 'Sexual abuse of a child', removing the connotations of consent in the current heading of the offence. A child cannot be in a sexual relationship. It must be called what it is: sexual abuse.

I acknowledge all survivors and the trauma you deal with every day. I will do whatever I can in my position in parliament and as a member of the broader community to support you. Like the member for King, it is hard not to think about my daughter when speaking on this bill. We all want our children to be safe—to feel safe and be safe—and the thought that one day they might not be is horrifying.

I am very grateful that the topic of child sexual abuse is not hidden away as much as it was when I was younger. I do not know that any of us had the words to talk about it growing up, but now there are so many advocates working in this space to ensure we talk about it, to give us the language, to help us know how we can keep our children safe, acknowledging that we cannot be with them 24/7. At the very least, we should have an open communication with the young people in our life so they know how to speak with us, know we are safe for them to speak with and know we will never question them and never blame them. I thank those advocates from the bottom of my heart, including the formidable Grace Tame.

As I am sure we are all very aware—I know there are many fans of her in this building, as you have likely heard for yourself in these speeches, especially from the member for Gibson—Grace Tame was Australian of the Year in 2021 in recognition of her extraordinary work raising awareness and supporting the prevention of child sexual abuse. In Tasmania, Ms Tame became the first woman in that state to legally be granted the right to speak under her own name with regard to her personal experience of sexual abuse as a child. She then went on to use her platform as Australian of the Year to fearlessly campaign, particularly through the #LetHerSpeak and #LetUsSpeak campaigns, led by the also formidable sexual assault campaigner and Walkley Award-winning journalist Nina Funnell.

I am really glad my friend and colleague the Attorney-General met with Ms Tame earlier this year to discuss her foundation's Harmony Campaign. The Harmony Campaign is aimed at achieving consistent laws in jurisdictions across the country that pertain to sexual assault. One of the areas in which harmonisation is sought by the campaign is in the language used to describe child sexual offences.

The decision to make the heading change included in this amendment bill is in no small part as a direct result of the tireless work of Ms Tame and the Harmony Campaign. Using the term 'relationship' to describe the offence of child sexual abuse implies some sort of mutual responsibility and consent. This is grossly inappropriate and it gives perpetrators the licence to characterise their abuse behaviours as consensual.

In Western Australia, New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania, the relevant child sexual offences now have headings that use the term 'persistent sexual abuse of a child'. Queensland and the ACT have recently changed the headings of their offences, and the Northern Territory is consulting on an exposure draft bill that would change the heading of their relevant offence. The language we use in this place and in our legislation is crucially important, not just because it will be interpreted by the judiciary and the broader legal profession but because it sets how South Australians are delivered information and how awareness is generated in the media.

I have no doubt South Australians would be shocked to learn that existing laws could allow a paedophile to describe their abuse as a relationship. That is why, thanks to the work of Ms Tame and other advocates, the Attorney-General and his team, we have a bill before us today to amend the Criminal Law Consolidation Act. This amendment bill will change the heading of section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act from 'Unlawful sexual relationship with a child' to 'Sexual abuse of a child'.

Importantly, this bill also inserts a new subsection into section 50 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act to disapply the Legislation Interpretation Act 2021 to provide that the heading does not form part of the section and that there is no intention for the new heading to affect the interpretation or operation of the offence. The maximum penalty for this offence is still, as it should be, imprisonment for life. I am proud to be part of the Malinauskas Labor government that is currently undertaking, alongside the Albanese Labor government, a broader review of the sexual consent and abuse laws that includes other issues raised by Ms Tame and her foundation's Harmony Campaign.

While technically a simple change, this bill sends a powerful message about our opposition to child sexual abuse, our understanding of the experience of survivor victims and our desire to change the way this offence is described and handled. Language is vital, it matters, and we simply cannot allow perpetrators of child sexual abuse the licence to characterise their abuse as consensual in any way, shape or form. It is not.

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) (12:12): I speak to close this debate and, in doing so, I thank the shadow attorney-general for his contribution. I also thank the members for King, Gibson, Davenport and Elder for their heartfelt contributions and for their generosity in sharing their passion about this issue. I am very grateful to them and, as always, strengthened by their willingness to speak together so strongly about these and other most important issues—some of the most important issues that we as a parliament confront. I wholeheartedly thank all of you for your words.

As has been said, this bill is a short bill—the number of words is small—but its impact is profound. Its impact absolutely sends a message that in no circumstances—never, ever—is there a sexual relationship with the child but, rather, only abhorrent sexual abuse of a child.

As others have said and as I have spoken about, we are so grateful to you, Grace, for your advocacy. I think the member for Gibson spoke about how you have strengthened the voice of other survivors and how, through your strength and courage, you have taken this forward. I just want to say to you, in thanking you again, that you also strengthen all of us in here as we go about making these changes. I am incredibly grateful to you for that and for taking the time to be with us today. It buoys us in what we do here, so thank you so much. Again, I commend this bill to the house.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clauses 1 and 2 passed.

Clause 3.

Mr TEAGUE: I note, as members have addressed just now in the course of the second reading, that the work the bill does is limited to the substitution of the heading as it presently stands, 'Unlawful sexual relationship with a child', and substituting, 'Sexual abuse of a child'. In those circumstances, I note that the body of section 50, the bulk of the 13 subsections of section 50 retain the impugned term 'unlawful sexual relationship with a child'.

Indeed, subclause (1) that sets out the offence continues to provide, 'an adult who maintains an unlawful sexual relationship with a child is guilty of an offence', with, as has been observed, a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life. The term 'unlawful sexual relationship' is defined in subsection (2), and then so on. My question is why those references, including the characterisation of the offence itself, are retained, particularly in circumstances where the focus here is on language?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: You raise a really important point, shadow attorney-general. It is certainly an issue that we as a government will explore, as other jurisdictions are similarly exploring, jurisdictions that have similarly changed the heading of their offence but that have, however, left that term in the body of the particular clause.

Similar to other jurisdictions, we are committed to moving forward on that particular issue around that word being maintained in the subject matter. The issue is that the royal commission into institutional child sex abuse actually—I do not know if the right word is to say it 'maintains' that particular word but it certainly does not address that particular issue.

There are currently two national reviews underway on this very issue, amongst other issues. One is an Australian Institute of Criminology review and the other review is through the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee of the Australian parliament, which is also taking in a broader inquiry into laws pertaining to consent across Australia.

The terms of reference for that review propose that the committee inquire into current and proposed sexual consent laws right across Australia, with particular reference to inconsistencies in laws across different jurisdictions, the operation of consent laws in different jurisdictions, any benefits of national harmonisations, how consent laws impact survivor experience of the justice system, the efficacy of jury directions about consent, the impact of consent laws on education, the findings of any relevant state or territory Law Reform Commission review or other inquiry and any other relevant matter.

As I said, the reason that I say we will continue to look at that issue is that we want to understand the outcomes of those two national reviews that are happening, as are other states that are also wanting to see what we can do across jurisdictions in a harmonised way to address that very issue. As I said, it is a really important question and it is one that we will certainly come back to. We do want to await the outcomes of those two reviews that I understand will contemplate the very issue that you raise. As well as changing it, having a desire to change that here, we want to make sure that there is national uniformity around any change going forward.

Mr TEAGUE: I note and appreciate the minister's response in that regard and I indicate my commitment and my wholehearted desire to work with the government in regard to any work that is going on in that regard. I guess I put it in the context of the observations of the member for King just now. We have seen how the interaction of the statute with the common law has led to change in terms of the substantive definition. Here we are focused on the important use of language and in all the circumstances that have been described.

If I might just take the chance, and it is really not for, as it were, opposition, but I think it is an important role of government to work through that necessary harmonisation work and report and all the rest of it, but I just make the observation that where the substance of the offence remains unchanged, and we see somewhat jarringly in this context that subsection (1) setting out the offence describes it in those terms still, I might suggest a change and a series of changes in the subsequent subsections to provide in subsection (1) that an adult who engages in sexual abuse of a child is guilty of an offence.

I would commend the government's reflection on that change and if there is more work to be done, including in the short term, to bring back a further amendment bill that addresses the substance of those matters throughout the body of section 50, then I can just indicate that I would welcome consideration of that.

As the member for King has described, we have dealt with expressions of persistent exploitation. We have a reference in section 1 to 'maintains'. If there are issues around how that is characterised, I suggest that that ought to present no difficulty in that the term for these purposes, the sexual abuse of a child, is defined as capable of being amended in terms of the definition in subsection (2). I just put all that on the record, and if it is indeed the case that the substantive description of the offence and the rest of those references can be expunged from the statute book, then that would be a welcome further step as far as I am concerned.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Again, I absolutely take the point. It is a really important point. I just wanted to provide a little bit of further information that may be helpful in terms of the steps going forward to, as you say, expunge from our laws that word and the horrendous connotations. One of the things I wanted to draw your attention to is that the Australian Institute of Criminology review that is being undertaken specifically had a process open to seek the input of survivors into the changes going forward. The closure for accepting submissions and survey responses was actually yesterday, so I think it is important that there is an opportunity to reflect on what survivors contribute through that process. As I said, the process closed yesterday, so I am sure we will hear more about that.

The other thing that I wanted to mention also is that, just for interest for the member—I am certainly happy to provide this information—it is South Australia, Queensland, ACT, New South Wales and Tasmania which have maintained the reference to that word 'relationship' in their legislation; however, they have changed, or taken steps to change, their heading. Victoria and Western Australia do not use that word 'relationship' in that offence. I say that because my understanding is that all of those jurisdictions are rightly focused on making sure that that change is made. We are committed to making that change.

The third piece of information that might be helpful to the member is that in our women's safety equality policy that we took to the election we made a very firm commitment to review all laws pertaining to consent to sexual activity in the broadest term, and prior to the election, when we were in opposition, I also moved a motion to establish a committee to do so. Unfortunately, that opportunity was not taken up at that time, but that review of legislation programs, education, etc. is underway. I am certainly happy to keep the member abreast of progress in that regard, but I hope the member takes that as an indication of, again as I have said a couple of times, our steadfast determination to resolve this particular issue and also to look at a range of other issues into the future.

Clause passed.

Schedule and title passed.

Bill reported without amendment.

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) (12:28): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

I would like to take the opportunity to say a couple of things that I meant to say very briefly before, and that is to wholeheartedly thank Kelly from the Attorney-General's Department and Elliot from the Attorney-General's office, Hilary Wigg from my office and parliamentary counsel, obviously, for their work on drafting the bill.

On behalf of everybody here in our parliament, I again very much thank Grace Tame for being with us today and strengthening us in this debate—strengthening us and bringing so many of us together to make change and to make sure a light continues to be shone wherever horrific child sexual abuse exists. So again I thank her.

Thank you to all the members who have contributed to this debate. Also, thank you to the Hon. Kyam Maher, who has just walked in: thank you very much to the Attorney-General for his work towards what is a really important moment for our state in terms of the passage of this legislation. Thank you very much, Attorney.

Bill read a third time and passed.

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