Michael Keenan (Stirling, Liberal Party, Minister for Justice) Share this | Hansard source

I will address the questions that the member for Moreton has asked and the contributions made by the member for Fisher and the member for Griffith. I will start by addressing the nonsense that was peddled by the shadow minister for justice, the member for Hotham. I have offered her a briefing on the budget process to try and explain how it works so she can make some more-informed comments when she comments on it, but instead she insists on coming up with these nonsensical untruths about the way the budget works. I am happy to repeat it to her again.

The budget works over a four-year cycle, and that is the way budgets have always worked. When we commit to a program over a period of four years, it terminates at the end of those four years. Those terminating programs are up for discussion. The Australian Federal Police will come back and talk to the government about the continuation of those measures. A very good example is the National Anti-Gang Squad. It was funded for four years, and when its funding ended we re-funded it for another four years. The shadow minister for justice continually asserts that the budget of the Australian Federal Police is somehow going down. That is complete and utter nonsense. The Australian Federal Police has never been supported in the way that it is currently: $1½ billion has been given to the Australian Federal Police and other agencies for counterterrorism measures in the most recent budget; $321.4 million extra specifically for the Australian Federal Police to increase its capabilities. The importance of that budgetary contribution announced in this year's budget was acknowledged by the commissioner in his speech today.

If the shadow minister for justice wants to continue to peddle untruths, if she wants to continue to display her ignorance about how the budget works that really is up to her, but I hope that nobody will take seriously anything that she suggests. The Australian Federal Police has never been supported better than it is now. I am very happy to renew my offer to provide her with a briefing about how the budget works. I would have assumed that most members of this place would have an understanding of it by now, but sadly the shadow minister for justice does not seem to have a clue.

Moving on to some of the issues that were raised by the member for Griffith—she has left the chamber; I am not sure why she is asking questions if she does not want to know the answer—and the member for Moreton about family violence—

Mr Perrett interjecting—

Maybe you could pass it on to her. Maybe she is watching in her office. Anyway, the Australian government takes very seriously the issue of family violence. We believe very strongly that all Australians deserve to live free from violence, free from fear and free from coercion.

On 22 March this year the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs announced its inquiry into a better family law system which will support and protect those families affected by family violence. This inquiry is ongoing and it will examine how the family system protects those affected by family violence and make recommendations to the government about how that system might be improved. There have been a number of expert reports to the government on family violence and the family law system. The committee's recommendations will be avidly devoured by the government once they are made, and we will respond as sensibly as we can.

The issue was raised by the member for Griffith about the cross-examination of victims in family law matters. We will soon release the proposed amendments to the Family Law Act that will ensure victims of family violence are not put in a position where they are personally cross-examined by their alleged perpetrators or are they themselves required to cross-examine their alleged perpetrators. We recognise that they are very important amendments to balance protection for victims of family payments with procedural fairness, as I am sure the member for Moreton can appreciate. In circumstances where direct cross-examination is banned, the proposed amendments will provide the cross-examination occur through an intermediary appointed by the court. This is happening in conjunction with the significant investments we have made in the family law system, including in this budget—$10.7 million for the purpose of engaging additional family consultants in family law matters, $12.7 million to establish parenting management hearings and $3.4 million to set up six new domestic violence units to provide essential services to women who are experiencing or are at risk of domestic or family violence.

I apologise to the member for Fisher; I shall address some of his concerns in my next available slot. (Time expired)

See this speech in context