Linda Burney (Barton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am very glad to join with the member for Lindsay and previous speakers in debate on this motion. I am also heartened by the fact that consensus has been reached in this place about the devastating effects of family violence in communities. As has been said, family violence does not discriminate. I think the member for Lindsay reminded us last week that, while we talk often in this House on motions about domestic violence, it is not abstract for her, and it is not abstract for many people in this place. I am reminded of the inaugural speech of Trish Doyle, the member for Blue Mountains, in the New South Wales parliament, who also recounted her personal experience as a little girl.

For 33 per cent of women, physical violence is experienced firsthand, and many more experience violence indirectly or experience non-physical abuse. I think it is really important that we put on record in this motion that family violence does not necessarily mean physical violence. There are many ways in which violence is perpetrated, including psychologically and financially. It includes things like smashing plates, smashing furniture around you and intimidation. I think that is not often recognised.

This week we have paid particular attention to the violence in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. But I want to reiterate here what I have said for many years: violence against women and children is not part of Aboriginal culture and there is no excuse. I am very proud of the display of unity from this parliament yesterday, when it linked arms and said, 'No more.' But it means nought if we do not take action. Awareness is welcome, and it is fantastic that as a community we are finally talking an issue which for too long has stayed behind closed doors, but the truth is that for many women who are currently experiencing violence our display of unity yesterday will not mean much in practical terms. What they need are services. They need a place to take their children to escape the violence and be safe and supported. They need to be able to access financial assistance and legal assistance. They also need the psychological support.

I am really pleased that the member for Lindsay, in her address to the parliament the other day, spoke about how for many years her mum was blamed for not leaving and it is not as simple as that. Because you are in a relationship with a violent partner does not mean that there are not feelings there between the two people. The people who say 'Why doesn't she just leave?' do not actually fully understand the situation. We talk so much about awareness. But what about action? I do not think we consider what failure of the systems means. It can mean the difference between life and death. I will tell you a story.

On Anzac Day in 2015 in Brewarrina, an 18-year-old Aboriginal woman was murdered by her father. The story rated a brief mention in the national and local papers—and brief it was. The murder was particularly horrific. I will not go into detail, but it was another family destroyed and a community even more traumatised. The murder barely rated a mention in the local paper and, as I said, the national and state papers hardly bothered to cover it. When that girl was murdered the local safe house, a refuge for women at risk, was almost impossible to contact. When my office ran to check, it was answered by a male voice on an answering machine directing women to call a mobile number—and that mobile number was not operating. It was not bad luck; it was a result of cuts to funding and services for domestic violence.

At the time, I spoke out. Family violence, particularly in western New South Wales and rural and remote areas, where there are many Aboriginal families across this country, continues to be a national crisis. But the media was not interested in that girl's death, and nor were governments. That incident, and the issue, went largely uncovered. The sad fact is that the rhetoric we hear on the issue of DV, whether it is from state or federal governments, is not always met with action. For all the talk we hear from those opposite about the first announcement from the Turnbull government being about the $100 million for measures to combat domestic violence, the funding offer, as the member for Lindsay just reminded me, does not come close to replacing the cuts that have already taken place. I would be very interested in just how much of that $100 million has actually been spent, what it has been spent on and why the spending is so slow if this is such a national crisis.

It was not Aboriginal women who cut legal services. It was not Aboriginal politicians who scrapped the Brighter Futures program in New South Wales. It was not feminists who closed domestic violence refuges for Aboriginal women and children in New South Wales and many other services as well. It was Liberal state and federal governments. These same people were silent when $3.6 million was cut from the Family Violence Prevention Legal Services. There was silence when the state Liberal government closed scores of specialist Indigenous violence services and also handed over to faith based organisations the secular women's refuge services in New South Wales.

That has meant a reduction of about 500 beds per night for women and their children escaping domestic violence. I do not want to be too pessimistic because we know that at least some of the measures will help, but let us just be clear that the Hey Sis program in New South Wales, which has been supported by private enterprise, is not being supported any longer; it is being cut—in fact, I think it has gone. The Tackling Violence program in New South Wales, which is one of the most effective domestic violence programs I have ever seen—using football teams as the catalyst to drive down the level of domestic violence in many communities—is being run down as well. All the federal funding has been withdrawn, despite the fact that there is this so-called $100 million.

The answer is not paternalism or command and control policy from Canberra. We cannot impose solutions on communities, black or white. Those communities have the solutions. It is up to us to support those communities and to listen to people that have had the experience. We know how devastating and intergenerational domestic violence is and, in fact, in some ways, it is a learnt behaviour, particularly for children who are growing up in those situations, which affects the choices that we make later in life. I am very proud that Labor has proposed policies like those announced by Bill Shorten the other morning: making it easier for victims to give evidence via video, so they are not, as the member for Lindsay discussed, cross-examined by their attackers; and making sure that as many people as possible have access to DV leave, so that the victims can take the time to go through the courts. It just astounds me that the Minister for Women in this government is refusing domestic violence leave for the people that are employed in the Department of Human Services. The CPSU is trying to get a workplace agreement in place that includes this, but the Minister for Women says, 'No'. Women escaping domestic violence or needing domestic violence leave will have to trade off their annual leave or some other sort of leave. How is that a government supporting victims of domestic violence, or survivors—I am not going to say 'victims'; survivors of domestic violence?

No-one should feel trapped in a violent relationship because they do not understand how to get out of it. It is up to members of parliament to empower those families to know what the steps can be to leave. It is scary and it is daunting. Often there is not the financial sustainability within that family and with those women and children to actually leave a relationship. I want to thank everyone in this chamber, particularly the member for Lindsay, for shining a light on this terrible scourge. That wonderful experience yesterday of being on the forecourt court and linking arms was a powerful show, but we have to back it with action. Like the member for Lindsay, this issue is not academic for me; it is lived experience, and that is not an unusual lived experience, unfortunately. I commend this motion to House.

Debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 12:43 to 16 : 00

See this speech in context