Philip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

Let me make it very clear that we are implementing a recommendation of the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs in relation to the definition of family violence. I am surprised at the comments of the shadow Attorney-General, because I think they are a reflection upon the diligence and competence of her colleagues who supported that resolution, and I am surprised that she, as a member of the committee, could not convince the committee, on the basis that more time was needed, that the Labor members of the committee should oppose the recommendation. But obviously she did not because this recommendation was supported by her colleagues on the committee, and it is a reflection upon them, it seems to me.

Let me say that this is not an issue that has been lightly accepted. My department consulted with key stakeholders on this matter. I turned my mind to the opposition’s approach, which simply removes reasonableness and revisits issues on which the committee had come to a concluded view. I think it also fails to recognise that, for instance, in South Australia legislation contains a definition that is similar to that proposed here. I think there are misconceived arguments by the opposition in supporting this proposal. The member for Gellibrand says that the courts have to get into the very tricky business of deciding what conduct would scare a reasonable person. I am advised that the Family Court, under the current law, looks at the extent of evidence to assess whether such a fear or apprehension is credible. Courts have to deal with these issues all the time—

See this speech in context