Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move the following motion:

That the House:

1) notes that:

a) Australians with a disability and their loved ones have been crying out for a royal commission to inquire into violence, abuse and neglect to people with disability;

b) only a royal commission is has the powers to compel evidence, conduct public hearings and provide a safe place for witnesses to shed a light on the shameful abuse and neglect being suffered by Australians with a disability;

c) today in the Senate at approximately 12 pm, the government voted against a royal commission to inquire into violence, abuse and neglect of people with a disability;

d) the government is right now desperately running down the clock so there is not enough time for the house to vote on the Senate's message; and

e) the government is doing all it can to avoid a second loss on the floor of parliament in just one week; and

2) therefore calls on this Prime Minister to allow enough time in the House so that the Australian people can know where he and the government stands on this important issue.

Leave not granted.

I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Maribyrnong from moving the following motion forthwith—That the House:

1) notes that:

a) Australians with a disability and their loved ones have been crying out for a royal commission to inquire into violence, abuse and neglect to people with disability;

b) only a royal commission is has the powers to compel evidence, conduct public hearings and provide a safe place for witnesses to shed a light on the shameful abuse and neglect being suffered by Australians with a disability;

c) today in the Senate at approximately 12 pm, the government voted against a royal commission to inquire into violence, abuse and neglect of people with a disability;

d) the government is right now desperately running down the clock so there is not enough time for the house to vote on the Senate's message; and

e) the government is doing all it can to avoid a second loss on the floor of parliament in just one week; and

2) therefore calls on this Prime Minister to allow enough time in the House so that the Australian people can know where he and the government stands on this important issue.

Labor has been calling for this royal commission since 26 May 2017. We understand the government does not know how to handle this issue, but that should not be a reason why we cannot vote on the issue of a royal commission. The Senate did a very important report examining the abuse and neglect of people with disability. That report recommended unequivocally that there should be a royal commission. Labor has met with carers, with people living with disability, with their advocates, with people who have shocking stories to tell.

The government sort of said that there's no need for a royal commission, that there is the NDIS—that'll fix matters up—or that the aged-care royal commission is a sufficient tool to look after people with disability. There's no doubt that the aged-care royal commission will look at how young people in nursing homes are going, but that is not all people with disability. There is no doubt that the NDIS has some standards and regulations which will cover about 10 per cent of people within the NDIS. But Labor will not give up on this call for a royal commission. We've heard this before. When we called for a royal commission into the banks, the government said there was no need. Eighteen months to two years later, the government eventually came to the party. But this royal commission into the lives of people with disability, and the existence of neglect and abuse, is in many ways much more urgent and in some ways even more serious than the banking royal commission.

We need to suspend standing orders to debate whether or not we should have a vote on a royal commission into disability. I draw to the attention of the parliament the Senate committee report, which says:

In its submission, Disability Clothesline noted the propensity for violence, abuse and neglect of people with disability living in institutional care to be 'swept under the carpet' and not be properly investigated. The submission contended that momentum for investigation and inquiry of any allegations of this nature requires the following thresholds to be met—

and these are criteria that would normally generate a debate about having an inquiry—

But the problem is that often these criteria for momentum are never fulfilled, and in the meantime people with disability are abused.

I understand that in this climate, with this contested parliament at this point in the cycle of the 45th Parliament, it might be tempting just to dismiss this debate and say, 'There's another time to do it.' But when is the right time to have a royal commission? If this is not the right time, when is? And, if we do not do it, who will do it?

It is a fact beyond doubt, beyond any conjecture or debate, that people with disability are more likely to suffer violence than people without a disability. It is a fact beyond doubt that children with a disability are three times more likely to experience bullying than children who do not live with a disability. The accounts of abuse in all its forms are harrowing, and I know every member of the parliament is upset when they read these accounts. The question is: what is the solution to the system—business as usual, or something significant of a sufficiently cathartic and powerful nature that we reconsider the whole way in which we're treating people with disability and the fact that they are subject to violence, abuse and neglect?

Too many people who have been victims of violence for too long have had to put up with their calls for help being ignored. This call for a royal commission is part of our promise to protect people with a disability from the scourge of violence and bullying, from abuse and marginalisation. When we first called for this royal commission, two years ago, we had no concept or knowledge of the current numbers in this House of parliament. For us, this has been an issue that we made a decision to back in two years ago. We make this decision to support a royal commission, not because we believe we would have a majority in the House but because the idea is the right idea for vulnerable Australians.

When we made that announcement I was accompanied by Senator Carol Brown and the member for Jagajaga. We met with people with disability and their parents, their carers and the people who love them. All members of the House have met the sorts of people I'm talking about—courageous people who call out abuse. They've shared their experiences with us, their trauma and their pain. What it is worth members of the House recalling when we suspend standing orders in order to debate the merit of a royal commission into the lives of people with disability and violence and extremism—what we want to say very clearly and what they've said to us—is that this royal commission is not for them; it's for all the people who are still suffering in silence.

No-one in this House can guarantee that this abuse will not happen again. No-one in this House can guarantee that we have currently in this nation a foolproof system to protect vulnerable people from neglect and abuse. On the very day that we announced this policy, Anne Malia, whose precious son Matthew suffered abuse, made an appeal to Australia. I'd like her words to be heard in this House now, even if it is in the context of this motion to suspend standing orders. She said:

We need to protect, not only the people who have stepped forward and have voiced what's happened to them, but thousands of people and children, adults and children, that don't have a voice, physically do not have a voice.

She went on to say—and whether or not we are successful today or on another occasion, her words ring true:

We need to be their voices, we need to protect them. Let's do this now, today.

We gave a promise then, and we give a promise now, to all the self-advocates, to the families, to the people who live with a disability, to all the parents who have teenage children, who worry about who will keep them safe when they no longer can.

I make it clear that, whatever happens in parliament today, Labor is committed to implementing a royal commission to protect people living with a disability from abuse. I understand that in the Senate it may be the case that the government, who voted against the royal commission, could receive the rescue party of One Nation to vote against a royal commission. Whilst that may be the case—that those One Nation senators, such as they are, are valuable allies to the government—I'm going to ask the government to reconsider their opposition to a royal commission into disability. And even if—

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You don't need a royal commission.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

People say you don't need to have a royal commission—I'll take that interjection from the current Leader of Government Business. A royal commission can exercise coercive power to compel the production of documents. It can compel people to appear and answer questions. It conducts its hearings in public. It can record witnesses' predictions that may not otherwise be available in court proceedings. It is fiercely independent. I know there have been many inquiries into this issue of protecting vulnerable people, but all of these inquiries don't seem to stop the problem. They don't seem to have worked to stop the abuse. We need to have fierce independence in a hearing. We need to have public hearings. We need to have the findings of a royal commission, which are taken more seriously than any other by governments and by the public. Only a royal commission can provide the safe space for people with disabilities.

The main recommendation of the 2015 Senate inquiry into violence, abuse and neglect against people with disability was a royal commission. I understand that today it may be easy for the government to say—well, not easy, but the government may say it—that disability shouldn't be the subject of partisanship. I agree that it shouldn't be the subject of partisanship, but it should not be subject to the tyranny of lowest common denominator. People with disability, as we speak, are subject to abuse and neglect. I don't expect that any Prime Minister or government can guarantee, right here and right now, the safety of people living with a disability in Australia. But if we can't guarantee the safety and the freedom from abuse and neglect of people with disability, why, for goodness sake, would we vote against a royal commission to protect Australians living with disability from abuse and neglect?

This is why standing orders should be suspended. If we are unsuccessful today, we will not give up until we are successful.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Linda Burney (Barton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Preventing Family Violence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Indeed the motion is seconded. In 2019, we don't need to read another story in the media about horrific abuse and we don't need to wait another minute; what we need is a royal commission. Every single member of this House has had in their electorate office parents and people with a disability. You all know exactly what we are talking about. You have all sat with these people and you've given them the assurances they need.

It should be a point of deep shame for the conservative government that the parliament is again debating the need to call for a royal commission to inquire into the violence and abuse of people with a disability. We already know that 90 per cent of women with an intellectual disability have been sexually assaulted and, for 60 per cent of these women, it occurs before they are 18. We all know that children with disability are at least three times more likely to experience abuse than any other children. It is time for a royal commission. The facts and the stories are numerous and horrific—and we all know them. For far too long this Liberal government have heard the calls of people begging them to take the steps to address the terrible abuse of people with disability and they have resolutely done nothing at all.

In May 2017, the Leader of the Opposition announced that the Labor government, upon forming government, would establish a royal commission into the violence and abuse of people with a disability. But here we are, almost two years later, still trying to convince the conservatives that the abuse of people with disability is a serious problem and it must be addressed. We all know the power and the importance of a royal commission. This issue, and the prevalence of the abuse, deserves nothing less than a royal commission. That is what we are asking for on behalf of the thousands and thousands and thousands of people that we all see on a regular basis in our electoral offices.

A royal commission is necessary, as the Leader of the Opposition said, for many reasons—some of which he's outlined—but a royal commission will also improve services and supports into the future, including fixing some of the problems with the rollout of the NDIS. Labor has carefully considered the recommendations of the Senate Community Affairs Committee inquiry into violence, abuse and neglect against people with a disability. The first recommendation of that report called for a royal commission into the abuse of people with disability. It is an important statement to have been made.

We also say very strongly that Labor believes that people with a disability have the right to be heard and to be believed. We will not allow these sickening crimes to be swept under the carpet while the conservatives continue to bury their heads in the sand. The Liberals think that the NDIS Quality and Safeguarding Framework will be sufficient. No, it won't. A royal commission is required—nothing less. We owe it to the many thousands of people that we talk to constantly. We owe it to the many thousands of people with disability that have experienced abuse and neglect. We owe it to the many thousands of parents whose children have a disability and that have gone through the horror that the Leader of the Opposition outlined of knowing that their child was abused. Try to put yourself in those families' shoes. If you put yourself in their shoes, you will know that nothing less than a royal commission is required on this issue. We stated it clearly two years ago that that's what's required. I say to the government: please listen, if not to me or the Leader of the Opposition or this side of the House, to the people and the families that you have spoken to in your electoral offices, and stay true and strong to the things that you've said to those people. You know a royal commission is required. I ask you to agree to one.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank members for their contributions. I note that the motion before the House is in relation to suspension of standing orders. The matter in terms of the motion that was moved in the Senate will be considered by the House when the parliament resumes next week. It was my understanding when I came in here today that that was precisely what was going to occur. What I understood was that today the opposition had cancelled the matter of public importance. As they didn't wish to use the time for the matter of public importance, the government decided to make that time available for question time.

Let me be very clear about the issue of a royal commission into the issue of those with disability abuse.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They may wish to listen, because I'm going to address the members' points. At no time as Prime Minister have I ever opposed what they are proposing. As Prime Minister, I have not. I have kept an open mind on this question. When this question was put to me, we were considering the issue of a royal commission into aged care. That was the priority I established, as Prime Minister, to move on. But I have not resolved not to do this. I have been considering this matter. My priority has been to deal with the royal commission into aged care, which is now underway. I am yet to see a terms of reference from the opposition, I must say, on this matter. They have had a policy for two years and yet no terms of reference. I suggest that one should have been produced, and I would have happily looked at one that was produced.

My point is very simple: this matter will be considered by the House. The government will consider this in all seriousness, as it should. These are serious issues. In the past, the government, in responding to Senate committees and numerous other reports, has taken the position that the National Disability Insurance Scheme is a scheme that is still being built. It is not yet built. To have a royal commission into a system that is effectively still being built—one would question the wisdom of that at this time. That said, that does not in any way, shape or form turn away from or fail to acknowledge the very serious issues of abuse that we know occur.

I am asking the opposition to continue to engage. I and my government will continue to engage on this issue. There are many ways that the issues that have been raised about abuse can be addressed, even, potentially, within the existing royal commission that we have established. But I will not let us leave this place with some suggestion that the government does not take these issues seriously. What we have done in government is act on royal commissions. The opposition, in the past, when they were in government, did not call a royal commission into this issue. They did not call a royal commission into the banks. They did not call a royal commission into aged care. On the latter points, we have done both and we are acting on both. We are acting on all 76 recommendations of the banking royal commission just concluded, and the royal commission into aged care is underway. On this further issue, we are open to considering how it can be best progressed. We have been taking action on these issues specifically through the commission that has been established, through the NDIS, to have the powers to examine and to provide remedies where these cases come up.

There is another part of the motion that has been put by the Leader of the Opposition, and it bells the cat as to the motive behind the opposition's actions this afternoon. I'm not afraid of losing votes in this House; I lost one on Tuesday! But I'll tell you who the losers were—the Australian people. The Australian people saw the weakness of a Leader of the Opposition who is more interested in the politics of this Canberra bubble than the border protection of our nation. I was prepared to come in here and face down the loss of that vote, because I have the courage of my convictions when it comes to border protection. The Leader of the Opposition cannot hold a candle to my convictions when it comes to protecting the security of this nation. So vote against us, if you like. Try and turn the tables on border protection, if you like. There is no middle ground between the Labor Party and the Liberal and National parties on border protection. There is a wide and huge chasm. There is no middle ground between us—

Debate interrupted.