Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I welcome this debate in this chamber today on this very important issue, the issue of protecting all people who are the victims of family violence. But while of course some men are victims of family violence, the government recognise that the vast majority of victims are women and children. Over the last three years the government are incredibly proud of the many ways in which we are supporting the victims of family violence with our very significant investments in our women safety packages and in the approximately $1.62 billion that has been provided over five years to legal assistance services, including $1.3 billion to legal aid commissions and community legal centres through the National Partnership Agreement on Legal Assistance Services.

I take issue with the shadow Attorney-General's comments in relation to cuts to legal aid funding. There have been no cuts to legal aid funding. In fact I also want to make the comment that a recent audit by National Legal Aid found that 79 per cent of grants paid were for family law matters, including issues of family violence, and that legal aid funding increases by $11.99 million over the life of the national partnership agreement.

I do agree that in one of the main components of this motion a very important point has been raised—that is, the cross-examination of victims by perpetrators. The Family Law Act makes a number of provisions in relation to providing better protections for vulnerable people in family law proceedings. For instance, vulnerable persons can give testimony via video in a closed court. The Family Violence Plan makes it clear that the family law courts have an obligation to identify at a very early stage those who are at risk of violence. That is a very important principle—along with the fairly broad discretion that the Family Court has and that judges have about the way proceedings are run. But I do want to concur with this motion; I think there is more that the government can do in this respect.

I do want to take issue though with the shadow Attorney-General's comments in relation to the provision of legal aid, because he has actually got it wrong. Any person appearing before the Family Court has an inherent right to appear as a self-represented litigant. Many people choose to do that, I think, motivated by ill-will, to cause even more grief to their partner or their ex-partner in Family Court proceedings. So the shadow Attorney-General has not got it correct when he says that funding availability for legal aid means that there are more self-represented litigants. It is one factor, but getting legal aid is not particularly easy; there are very stringent requirements in relation to who can access legal aid.

But certainly I am very pleased that the Attorney-General has already indicated that the government is open to new ways we can better protect victims. I would certainly like to see the absolute maximum protection, so that this practice does not continue. It is something that I have raised in my capacity as a member of the backbench policy committee on legal affairs. It is something I have expressed a number of concerns about.

I also want to commend the government on the very significant work that is being done with other complementary measures aimed at addressing family violence, such as the bench book. In August of last year, the first part of the Commonwealth-funded National Domestic and Family Violence Bench Book was released by the Australasian Institute of judicial administration. One of the most common concerns we hear is that judges get it wrong and they do not appreciate some of the incredible issues that confront those who suffer family violence. This bench book is very important.

I had the great pleasure of meeting with Rosie Batty and the Women's Legal Services Australia representatives. They have a very important platform about safety first in family law. I do want to commend Rosie and Women's Legal Services Australia for their five-step plan, which includes developing a specialist pathway for DV cases in family courts and ways we can reduce trauma and support those who are most at risk of future violence and death.

The other three points—if I can just indulge you for a moment, Mr Deputy Speaker—are: intervention early and providing effective legal help for those who are most disadvantaged; the fourth point is to support women and children to financially recover from domestic violence; and the last point is to improve education of family law professionals dealing with domestic violence and trauma.

So I do want to commend the report of Rosie Batty the Luke Batty Foundation and Women's Legal Services Australia. I think that really takes this issue forward, and I am looking forward to how we can act to protect women and children, and some men, from domestic violence in the context of family law proceedings.

See this speech in context