HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2017-09-27 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Bills

Statutes Amendment (Bullying) Bill

Introduction and First Reading

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (16:11): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 and the Intervention Orders (Prevention of Abuse) Act 2009.

Second Reading

The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (16:11): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I rise today to introduce the Statutes Amendment (Bullying) Bill or, as it is otherwise affectionately known in the community and how I will be referring to it, Libby's Law. The tragic case of Libby Bell has rung through the media of late and resonated within our community, with great reason. When a successful 13-year-old suicides as a result of bullying, it signals that our system is seriously failing its most vulnerable.

I would like to outline the stories of Libby Bell, Cassidy Trevan and Brodie Panlock to highlight severe types of bullying, which this bill is intended to capture, before discussing the specifics of the bill. I will then discuss accounts I have received in the last week from concerned parents whose child has endured bullying in our South Australian schools. These stories will demonstrate why it is that the Australian Conservatives are giving voice to these victims by presenting this bill to the parliament today.

I will start with Libby's story, which will be well known to members of this place, given the extensive media coverage that this tragic tale has received. Libby Bell was a year 8 student at Seaford Secondary College who, after a prolonged campaign of bullying, tragically took her own life just recently.

The family have explained that Libby suffered years of cyberbullying over the mediums of Facebook, Snapchat and Instagram. Libby endured physical bullying within the schoolyard but also at other locations within the community, including a brazen bullying attack at a local fast food restaurant, which has received extensive TV coverage, where she had a drink thrown in her face very publicly.

What may have started as pointless teasing and ridicule escalated very quickly and, in Libby's case, ended in very tragic circumstances. I have read an online commentary where a mother of a girl who attended the same school alleged Libby's main bully also instigated a prolonged and vicious attack on her daughter. Thankfully that case did not end in suicide. However, without intervention, who knows what would have happened.

We should not have to be introducing a bill such as this. When people are bullied to the point that they believe suicide is their only option, it is a tragic reflection on our society. This behaviour should never have been allowed to go as far in this school and in this situation. However, there are so many stories of bullying that I fear, if we do not make an attempt to stamp out this endemic situation, it will not be long before there will be more tales similar to Libby's that emerge.

So, I now pause to reflect a little bit on Cassidy's story. It is another appalling case that involves a 13-year-old girl who was bullied relentlessly at school to the extent that she ended up taking time off school and sought help to overcome the damage done by her bullies and to learn the appropriate coping skills to enable her to return to school.

Upon her return to school, her bullies apologised for their behaviour and offered her their friendship. They invited her to a local festival the next night, to which she went along, excited and hoping that things would smooth themselves out. Instead of going to the festival, though, they arranged for her gang rape, unbelievably. The young girl, fearing for her safety and further abuse from her bullies, reported this issue to police but was too frightened to make an official statement and pursue the prosecution of the individuals involved. Despite this horrendous act perpetrated against her, Cassidy was still subjected to intense bullying for another two full years until the age of 15, when she took her own life. To date, no-one has been questioned in relation to this bullying incident, as we understand it.

I now turn to Brodie's story. Brodie is, of course, a case that members of this place may be familiar with, given the extensive media coverage that it also had some time ago. Brodie Panlock was a young 19-year-old Victorian girl, ending her life after ongoing humiliating and intimidating activity by her work colleagues. Astoundingly, despite their actions being implicated in something as serious as suicide, those responsible were never charged with a serious criminal offence under the requisite crimes act in Victoria. The Brodie's Law Foundation website states:

Brodie's death was a tragic reminder of the serious consequences that bullying can have on victims, their families and the community and illustrated that there were obvious limitations in the law and conduct involving serious bullying should be subject to criminal sanctions.

This was the conclusion the Victorian parliament came to and agreed with and therefore passed subsequent legislation in June 2011, punishing an act of serious bullying with a maximum penalty of up to 10 years' imprisonment. Libby's Law, which I introduce to this parliament today, is based to a large degree on Brodie's Law, being modelled and passed in Victoria.

This bill before us is largely modelled on that law, as I said. For an act to constitute bullying, it must be proved that there was an intention to cause harm or recklessly cause harm. I stress that point: it must be proved that there was intention to cause harm or recklessly cause harm, that the bullying was over a period of at least seven days or more, and that the act of bullying caused harm or serious harm to the victim.

In instances of severe bullying, where it is proved that serious harm was caused, the maximum penalty is 10 years' imprisonment under this bill. Obviously, the three cases that I have discussed so far would fall within the ambit of causing serious harm to the victim. In all other cases where bullying falls within a scale of what might be considered lesser offending, it attracts a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment. This bill also allows for alternative verdicts in instances where a conviction is appropriate, but the offensive bullying has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Imprisonment would be considered as a last resort, of course, and only in cases of extreme bullying.

The more likely range of penalties would be handed down at the judge's discretion, including fines and community service or perhaps a combination of both, depending on the seriousness of the offence. The Australian Conservatives have considered the substance of this bill in detail. It is not our intention to clog the courts with trivial matters or in any way to limit freedom of speech. I certainly emphasise that point: it is not our goal to in any way limit freedom of speech or to create provisions whereby minor incidents constitute bullying and carry a criminal penalty. That is not the purpose of this bill and it is not the effect of this bill.

We have gone to great lengths to ensure that only the very serious and prolonged attacks that actually cause harm and were intended to cause harm are captured under this legislation, making a clear distinction between bullying and simple name calling, for example. We further believe that a protection against frivolous accusation is that all acts carry a mental intention; that is, an intent to cause harm or recklessly cause harm. Without this, bullying cannot be proved and it is not our intention that it be done under this bill. We believe we have struck the right balance between providing an effective bill for the victims of bullying and ensuring that trivial issues will not be pursued at the cost of the taxpayer under this bill.

I believe that it will not be, so I just want to emphasise for a moment the importance of striking the right balance. Under this bill it needs to be sustained bullying, where the intent is clear from the individual—the bully, if you like. So, that is very much what we have drafted here, and we are certainly open to the input of other members of this place if they have other suggestions on how that might be achieved.

With respect to South Australian accounts, I would like to share some accounts of families who have contacted me in relation to the bullying that their child has endured in South Australian schools. These stories are intended to be a snapshot of conduct that gives some idea of the prevalence of bullying in our school system and how over time, despite the education to date and the changes in school policies that have taken place, bullying still occurs at an alarming rate and is causing substantial detriment to our young people.

These stories are indicative of what I believe is bullying that is endemic in our society. I was deeply disturbed when a mother contacted my office after two of her children were bullied at the primary school they attended in South Australia. She reports that her children suffered various forms of bullying that went unpoliced by staff, but she was most concerned that one child endured daily strangulation at the hands of her bully, whilst another child suffered a fractured rib. In an email to me, she said:

The school basically did nothing…we pulled them out of that school, however I really feel parents should not have to do this. It was easier for the school to get rid of the victim rather than to deal with the issue properly. I wish I had gone to the police looking back at it, as it caused a whole lot of mental issues for my kids.

Unfortunately, parents too frequently have to pull their children out of schools to try to stop bullying.

I received another email from a mother who reported the same issue. She was aware of her daughter being bullied inside and outside of school. The number of times she suffered bullying is unclear, as she only started speaking about the issues after a prolonged period of torment. However, it is estimated that the bullying took place for six to 12 months at least. This young girl, who was 11 at the time, was told repeatedly by her bullies to kill herself. These bullies graffitied her school books. and when the teachers reprimanded the student for this and she informed them that her bullies did this, she was simply refused to be believed.

She was relentlessly physically and mentally bullied, and those teachers charged with her care were unprepared or unaware of how to effectively manage the situation. This young girl showed repeated trauma caused by bullying and even went as far as to draw a cut line along her wrist with stitches holding the wound together. Even then, the main perpetrator was not disciplined in any way. The school was alerted to the issues of bullying, but the perpetrator's parents were never contacted, not even at the request of the victim. Nothing was ever done, to any effect. I am informed that this was not an isolated case within that particular school. In her email to me, the child's mother has said:

We as parents were not supported by her school at all and the processes or lack thereof that they have in place. We felt helpless. Had we as parents not removed her from that environment we don't know what could've happened or how far things could've gone. We still hear negative things about the other girl. If her behaviour had been confronted head on at age 10-11 then other girls would not have gone and be going through today what my daughter did yesterday.

Another constituent contacted me about their personal experience during high school. This person was very well known to school staff and related to several people in high level authority within the school. However, despite these relationships, which one might normally consider to be protective of that individual, she was not spared from bullying.

Initially, the bullying started with someone close to her who was quite popular in the school and bullying anyone who tried to befriend her, essentially ensuring that she had no friends. She recounts how she felt isolated after she was subjected to taunts of being bashed, or after public humiliation for being too fat or having no friends. Her bully assigned people to follow her on breaks and report her movements. While she found some relief hiding out in toilets, she feared that someone would report back yet again to her bully and that she would suffer the consequences.

At times, she sought solace in unlocked cars in the staff car park. Wintertime would bring great relief as the cars were cool and she could spend her entire break in the car. However, in summertime the car would be so scorchingly hot that she would revert back to spending time in the library or in the toilet blocks, which of course would elicit the wrath of her bully. It was not long until her bully's friends asked her for sexual favours in empty classrooms and the boys' toilets or empty cubicles. Fearing a negative report being given back to her bully, she complied with requests despite hating every minute of the events. In an email she said:

School was a place I hated and felt uncomfortable and isolated. When I wasn't being emotionally or physically bullied I was tired and anxious and depressed about when the next event would occur.

I felt like I had no-one to turn to yet I felt like it was obvious and everyone knew what went on but no-one really cared. I remember thinking no-one would notice if I ran away and disappeared. I hated that people exerted power over me and I just let them but I felt unable to fight it and knew the consequences if I did.

Whilst my focus thus far has been predominantly on bullying within the schoolyard, it is in no way limited to school students, of course. Workplace bullying is an issue that needs to be addressed, as we saw in the case of Brodie Panlock, which I outlined earlier in this contribution. After a constituent contacted me to share how they grew up stuttering, I was interested in their case, and they explained to me the specifics of the bullying they had endured.

As you can imagine, the schoolyard teasing was relentless, but this brave young man endured as best he could. To his credit, he learned coping mechanisms that have benefited him later in life. However, to my absolute dismay, I learned that, until recently, he was subjected to bullying at least once every single day in his career. This is an honest man, a positive contributing member of our society who was working to support his family and who was regularly abused for something as petty and uncontrollable as a speech impediment.

We have grown up in a culture where bullying is not attracting the attention and consequences it should. In my opinion, it is endemic in our schools and our society, as those who were once bullies at school often are not met with appropriate measures requiring them to acknowledge and admit their behaviour and change their actions. Consequently, they continue their rampage in the workforce and in social settings as adults. This behaviour simply has to stop.

We find ourselves in a situation whereby increasingly we are teaching our children about their rights, which serves as an important lesson for them. However, we are not effectively teaching them that with a right comes a responsibility and that actions have consequences. There are important principles that children need to learn, and regardless of where the blame falls, we have people today who seem to be impervious to this concept.

The Conservatives believe that this bill recognises the serious harm caused by bullying and creates an approach whereby serious actions do have consequences. To reiterate, it is most important that it is understood that this bill is not intended to impinge on free speech in any way, shape or form, and we are confident that it does not. Nor should it be used to pursue trivial matters, and again, we are confident that it will not.

Rather, it is intended to capture cumulative acts of targeted bullying where the perpetrator specifically intends to cause harm. We have heard repeatedly from parents that there are not sufficient mechanisms to police bullying in schools and even in the workplace. It is our intention that this bill will send a clear and concise message to bullies: 'Your actions have never been acceptable, but from this point forward, there will be consequences should you continue to behave in such a manner.'

I will finish my contribution with a few short notes. The bill in its current draft form has received substantial community support. There is an online petition which the Conservatives have no involvement in whatsoever but which has been endorsed by Libby Bell's family. In just over a week or so, as I understand it, that petition has received some 22,380 signatures in support of the bill. Clearly, there is an outcry in the community for action on this. I also remind members that, as they are no doubt aware, the South Australian Commissioner of Police has himself called upon the government to introduce legislation to deal with issues of bullying, so that they could be appropriately prosecuted where it is reasonable to do so.

In closing, it might also be relevant to share some statistics with the chamber. From an education department's own survey, which was conducted earlier this year, it was discovered that some 14 per cent of students in our schools regard themselves as having been bullied on a weekly basis. If you do the maths, that equates to about 5,000 students a week, which I think is absolutely extraordinary and frankly disgraceful—something that must be dealt with.

Following that survey, the parents' body of the state schools' SAASSO conducted a survey asking their members whether they believe there should be laws to deal with bullying. That was less than a month ago; I am not sure of the exact date, but it was only in the last few weeks. That survey found that there was 80.12 per cent support for bills. The specific question they asked was, 'Should the Weatherill government toughen laws on bullying?' and 80.12 per cent voted yes while 19.88 per cent voted no, so there is a strong level of support with over 1,200 votes being received and with 93 per cent of those votes being received from parents.

I think there is substantial support for this bill in the community. Certainly, the family of Libby Bell have indicated their support for the bill, and I really hope that this is able to pass this place. I indicate to the chamber that I will be calling for a vote in November this year. I have yet to determine the exact date but it will be in November to allow enough time for the bill to go to the lower house. My plan would be to have it in place and in law in January next year. I commend the bill.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. G.E. Gago.

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