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

Let me just make the point that we do not object to the principle behind the amendments. But the government will be pressing ahead with the amendments that I will be moving later, as outlined in the package, rather than accepting these amendments. The reason for this is very clear. Although the amendment proposed makes a note which currently appears under the definition of ‘major long-term issues’ a legislative provision, doing this will have little effect, but it may assist in making clearer the intention that repartnering is not of itself a major long-term issue. Particularly for non-represented parties, having it in the act may put it beyond doubt in their minds, even though it does not have any legal import.

Regrettably—and I do not know whether one should draw any inferences from this—the opposition amendment does not simply take the note and translate it into a legislative provision. It makes minor changes to the note. In addition, we do not accept those changes. That is why we are pressing ahead with the direct incorporation of the note in the legislative measure rather than, by implication, picking up further amendments, which I do not think were being proposed in an up-front way.

The government amendments also adopt a proposed opposition amendment to section 63C, which is the section that sets out what a parenting plan is for the purposes of the act. We do not believe the amendment is necessary, but it confirms the common law position that a parenting plan must be free from threat, duress or coercion. Government amendment (24) implements the views that I have received from a number of stakeholders that an objective of division 11 orders—which are orders to address inconsistencies between state family violence orders and family law orders—is to make it clear that the government’s policy of family violence not being tolerated is the approach to be taken. I oppose the opposition’s amendments for the reasons I have outlined, but I will be proposing separate amendments that I believe deal with the substantial issues.

See this speech in context