Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It's with a heavy heart that I rise today—not because I don't support this bill, but because we need to enact legislation to try to prevent child sexual abuse. The Crimes Legislation Amendment (Sexual Crimes Against Children and Community Protection Measures) Bill 2017 represents tough new laws. It represents the greatest crackdown on paedophilia in a generation. They say it takes a village to raise a child, but I also say it takes a village to protect a child. I want to thank the member for Swan, and the previous speaker, for their contributions. The member for Swan's contribution was heartfelt and a significant contribution to the debate.

Before I address the House in relation to the specifics of this bill, I would like to recognise a campaign that is being run by YGAP. We held a morning tea for it in my office yesterday. YGAP promotes a campaign called Polished Man, which seeks to raise awareness of sexual and physical violence against children. We had a number of people from this House come to my office yesterday to support the Polished Man campaign, and I would like to point them out specifically. They were: the Chief Government Whip, Nola Merino; the Assistant Minister for Cities and Digital Transformation, Angus Taylor; the member for Wide Bay, Llew O'Brien; the member for Bonner, Ross Vasta; the member for Goldstein, Tim Wilson; the member for Dunkley, Chris Crewther; and the member for Mackellar, Jason Falinski. This is not just a 'this side of the House' thing. It was also supported by members opposite, for which I'm very grateful: the member for Burt, Matt Keogh, and the member for Macarthur, Dr Mike Freelander. Importantly, the Minister for the Environment and Energy was there, and, most importantly, the Prime Minister also came and showed his support. The Prime Minister said, 'As we know, not all acts of disrespecting women or children lead to violence, but that's where it begins.' This is about respecting the women and children in our lives and showing them love. That is when we are closest to being our very best and when we are closest to God—when we are showing love. All of us have a vested interest and a duty to look after all of our children.

This event yesterday in my parliamentary office followed a similar morning tea that we had in my own electorate in Fisher, where I had prominent sporting men and businessmen attend the event, such as: Chris Flannery, the CEO of Sunshine Coast Falcons; Matt Soper-Lawler, the winger and top try scorer for the Sunshine Coast Falcons; Jack Hansen, the head coach of Alexandra Headland Surf Club; Ashley Robinson, the general manager of Alexandra Headland Surf Club and the chairman of the Sunshine Coast Falcons; Clayton Williams, a local businessman; and Peppi Bueti, a local businessman. The media got behind us as well, as they did yesterday. People like Danielle Ford, Dan Toney, Charles Hodgson and Hailey Francis painted nails to support the cause of Polished Man.

People might ask: 'Why polish a nail? What's that got to do with sexual assault against children?' I think it would be fair to say that most men don't walk around with a polished nail. The purpose of the Polished Man campaign is to engender a conversation, particularly amongst men, so that we can start to drive a culture in our country that speaks up against violence against children—that we as men, in particular, say, 'Enough is enough.' It is utterly unacceptable for men to disrespect women and children by committing acts of violence against them and even more so when those acts of violence involve acts of sexual violence. For a person to have an instant moment of sexual gratification which will leave a child scarred for life, physically and mentally, is abhorrent and almost beyond words. What is it particularly about some men that they would rather put their own sexual gratification for a short moment above the life of a child who will carry that event with them for the rest of their lives? It's a rhetorical question, but I will never understand that attitude.

According to the World Health Organization, 150 million girls and 73 million boys worldwide under the age of 18 have experienced sexual violence. Just ponder on this: one child dies every five minutes around the world at the hands of an adult. That is part of the significance of Polished Man. We wear a polished nail on one out of our five fingers as one child dies every five minutes. All funds raised in the Polished Man campaign go to trauma recovery and trauma prevention programs for children who've suffered or who are at risk of suffering from violence and sexual violence around the world.

I turn now to the bill. This bill provides a comprehensive re-examination of the way in which we deal with those who commit the most heinous of crimes against our children. It amends various provisions that we currently have in our Criminal Code. It amends vulnerable witness protection measures to prevent children and other vulnerable witnesses from being cross-examined at a committal proceeding. We all know—well, some may not, but, as barrister of 16 years, I can tell you—this is an experience that many children find harrowing.

The bill also seeks to introduce a presumption against bail for certain Commonwealth child sexual offences. If a person is charged with an offence against a person, there should be a presumption against bail. They should be in a show-cause position where they have to show cause for why it is that they should get bail. It is not a landmark concept. Offences of violence in Queensland put an accused person in a show-cause position.

These provisions include additional factors which must be taken into account when sentencing federal offenders to ensure they are appropriate, given the nature of the offending. They create a presumption in favour of an actual term of imprisonment. This amendment will ensure that, unless exceptional circumstances exist, all child sex offenders serve an actual term of imprisonment, rather than receiving sentences that are wholly or partially suspended. It requires that when a court is making a recognisance release order for a child sexual offender the offender be put under supervision, and it sets rehabilitation treatment as a condition unless it's otherwise inappropriate.

The provisions include a presumption in favour of cumulative sentences. Many in this place who aren't legally trained perhaps wouldn't understand that. For example, in the United States we hear about people serving multiple life sentences. In Australia, generally sentences are handed down concurrently—it doesn't matter how many offences you commit; you generally get a sentence which reflects the one sentence. So, if you've committed five offences, you would generally only get a penalty as though it was one. That will not be the case under these provisions, and I think that that's a very good thing. Why do I say that? It is because, if an offender has committed an offence against, say, five or six children, and is sentenced as though it was one person, what does that say to the other four or five kids? What does that say to them? It really demeans the experience that they've been through. This amendment will provide greater disincentive, greater deterrence, for those committing similar offences.

These provisions will list community safety as a factor that can be taken into account to revoke a federal offender's parole without notice. They will require a period of time to be served in custody if parole is revoked.

These provisions will also introduce mandatory sentencing for certain Commonwealth child sex offences. The office of the Commonwealth DPP has advised that it appeals a high number of child sex offence cases due to manifestly inadequate sentences imposed by judges at first instance and for repeat offences. Mandatory minimum sentences will apply to the most serious child sex offences. Mandatory minimum sentences reflect the heinous nature of child sexual abuse. The provisions introduce mandatory sentencing for repeat offenders. Mandatory sentencing schemes will also apply to child sex offenders who have previously been convicted of a child sex offence, including state and territory offences.

Since 2012, only 58.7 per cent of convicted Commonwealth child sex offenders have received a term of imprisonment, and the average for those who do get a term of imprisonment is six months. This issue was raised, interestingly, by a very significant retired District Court judge, Judge Wall QC, who just last week criticised the recent sentences that were being handed down. He mentioned the case not of a child sexual assault but of a physical assault which led to the death of a child. He called them 'manifestly inadequate'. He also said that many of the judges of first instance—trial judges and sentencing judges—are concerned that, if they hand down too harsh a sentence, they'll be slapped down by the Court of Appeal. Whilst I am not a huge fan of mandatory sentencing in all cases, in this case it is called for. In this case, where we have the most heinous of crimes, we need to set a floor. We need to set a minimum so that judges can't go underneath that minimum. The Labor Party has itself supported mandatory minimum sentences in relation to child- and people-smuggling laws. (Time expired)

See this speech in context