Bill returned from Main Committee for further consideration; certified copy of the bill presented.

Ordered that this bill be considered immediately.

Amendment—

That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: “whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1)

note that the first priority of family law should be to promote and secure the best interests of children and that this requires a focus on:

(a)

the responsibility of parents to care for, love and provide security to children;

(b)

the need to prevent children from being victims of, or exposed to, violence, abuse or neglect; and

(c)

without compromising the above, the benefit to children of knowing and spending time with their parents;

(2)

note that, despite this bill, the Howard Government has made shared parenting before and after separation more difficult through its constant attacks on Australian families, such as the recent industrial relations changes and its failure to meet the chronic child care shortage;

(3)

note the risk that the Government is creating false expectations that this bill will create a right for parents spending equal time with their children, when the bill does not do this, in many cases this would not be appropriate and it shouldn’t automatically be the starting point for negotiations;

(4)

note that the Government has improved its bill by adopting Labor’s ideas that:

(a)

for parents intent on demanding parental ‘rights’,  the Court will consider the extent to which parents have exercised their responsibilities as parents -  recognising that parenting is a two-way street; and

(b)

strengthened compliance measures should be coupled with costs for nuisance complainants, so that the right to seek a remedy cannot be used irresponsibly;

(5)

note that the effectiveness of these reforms will fundamentally depend on the implementation of the Family Relationship Centres program, so that these centres can provide appropriate advice, counselling and referral as well as dispute resolution services and calls on the Government to commit to:

(a)

providing adequate resources to Family Relationship Services and Centres;

(b)

regular reappraisal of needs and funding to ensure free services;

(c)

requiring that Family Relationship Centres focus on quality advice, not simply quantity of parenting plans;

(d)

equipping staff to detect the signs of family violence and child abuse and manage violent clients;

(e)

ensuring that Family Relationship Centres do not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, age, disability, gender or socio-economic disadvantage and are not used to advocate or encourage any particular political or religious agenda;

(f)

instituting a well-resourced and effective complaints process for people who have grievances with Family Relationship Centres or their staff;

(6)

demand that the Government immediately release accreditation and quality standards for Family Relationship Centres prior to mediation becoming compulsory;

(7)

note that, while separating parents should be encouraged to settle their disputes without recourse to the Courts, litigation needs to be recognised and supported as a vital pathway for those cases involving family violence or abuse, entrenched conflict or intractable disputes;

(8)

note that the Government needs to invest in and make public thorough, longitudinal research on:

(a)

the consequences of family law reform;

(b)

interaction between violence and family law; and

(c)

the need for a broad ranging parliamentary inquiry on violence in the community;

(9)

note that the Government should, in the near future, conduct a review of how these changes work in practice, with particular consideration of the following issues:

(a)

the operation of the requirement to consult on ‘major long-term issues’  (compared to the original recommendation from the Every Picture Tells a Story report limited to location);

(b)

the interaction of parenting plans and court orders:

(c)

the need to review Schedule 3 as soon as the assessment report of the Family Court’s pilot of the Children’s Cases Program is available, given that these changes are being made before that pilot is completed and evaluated;

(10)

note the Government’s failure to consider a National Commissioner for Children and Young People, who could provide a role developing expertise in supporting children in family law matters”.

See this item in context