Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (2), (38) and (54) together:

(2)    Schedule 1, item 4, page 5 (lines 6-12), omit the note, substitute

Note:   To remove any doubt, a decision by a parent of a child to form a relationship with a new partner is not a major long-term issue in relation to the child.

(38)  Schedule 1, after item 15, page 20 (after line 4) insert:

15A  Paragraph 63C(1)(b)

Repeal the paragraph, substitute

       ‘(b)    is or was made between the parents of a child free from any threat, duress or coercion; and’

(54)  Schedule 6, item 1, page 134 (after line 15) insert:

     ‘(ab)    to ensure that orders, injunctions and arrangements referred to in subparagraph (a)(ii) do not expose people to family violence; and’.

These three amendments deal with issues that the government agrees with. They were part of a range of amendments that were provided to the government a couple of weeks ago. I am very pleased that the government has seen the benefit of including these amendments in the bill. The Attorney might be able to assist on whether he intends to vote for these amendments or intends including them in his package of amendments which will be moved later. In any case, I think it is important to acknowledge these changes and to acknowledge that a number of Labor’s suggestions are practical ones and are important things to include in the legislation and that the government has been prepared to accept them.

In particular, two of these changes deal with a number of our concerns that relate to violence and, as people in this House know, it has been a major concern for us to have these matters included in the legislation. One is to ensure that, if a parenting plan is made under threat, duress or coercion, it would not be regarded as valid. Because we do have a large number of self-represented litigants in this jurisdiction, I think it is important to have that expressly provided for in the act. It makes clear that a parenting plan must be freely agreed to between the parties, not under some sort of threat, force or fear. I am pleased that the government has seen fit to include that provision in the amendments to this legislation.

The other two amendments deal with major long-term issues—moving something that is in a note into the provision itself to ensure that it is being given some force, and clarifying a definition, which it seems might have been changed through redrafting rather than by any intent, so that it is an object of the act that ‘people’ should not be exposed to violence. Whilst many of the provisions deal specifically with children—our priority in family law is to deal with the protection of children—it is of course a clear objective of everybody in this House to ensure that we do what we can to protect people, not just children, from violence. I am pleased that the government has indicated that it will agree to these three amendments.

See this speech in context