Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Scrutiny of Government Waste Committee) Share this | Hansard source

I stand to support the Crimes Amendment (Working With Children—Criminal History) Bill 2009 and also to put on record my thanks to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee secretariat for their help and assistance in putting together the report that was tabled in the Senate in November 2009 in response to this particular bill. We received 17 submissions. We had a hearing in Melbourne in early November and we had a number of organisations and individuals who made submissions and gave evidence at our public hearing. As this was one of the last reports of the secretary, Peter Hallahan, I want to put on the record my sincere thanks to him. I have done that before and I say it again. He has now retired and I hope he is thoroughly enjoying himself and spending time with his family. He has done an excellent job for and on behalf of the secretariat together with the support of Margaret Cahill and Cassimah Mackay.

Having said that, the report did recommend a review after three years. I am pleased the government has listened and read the report and will have a review within two years and then another review two years after that. I think that is important. The Liberal senators, Mary Jo Fisher and I, made some additional comments because we agree 100 per cent with the imperative of minimising the risk of sexual, physical and emotional harm to children by stringent screening of people who are seeking to work with them, but we wanted to highlight that a number of significant and respected organisations, including the Law Council of Australia, held reservations about a number of aspects of the bill. Those reservations related to whether sufficient justification has been provided for overriding important legal principles associated with quashed and pardoned convictions. That really means giving those people who are so affected, whether they have quashed or pardoned convictions, the opportunity to get back into the community and back into life again.

The other areas of concern that we raised were the lack of a definition of ‘working with children’ and the adequacy of privacy safeguards. I will not say any more; it is set out in the report. We have made some recommendations there with respect to the importance of a consistent definition of ‘working with children’ and of ensuring the adequacy of privacy safeguards. On the basis that there is a review within two years and the importance of making children the top priority and ensuring their potential is achieved—they are properly cared for, looked after and protected in all ways, shapes and forms; physically, mentally and in every other respect—I support the bill and again thank the secretariat for their support in pulling the report together. I commend the bill.