Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Bill 2018 and the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2018.

Child sexual abuse is abhorrent. I cannot state that in strong enough terms. It is vile. For way too many years it was hidden and too often suspected but unspoken of and not reported. And that is our great shame. Too often, too many of us turned our backs on the horror of child sexual abuse. We were afraid to confront the dreadful truth, to even acknowledge the victims' stories, let alone believe them, and then to seek justice on their behalf. But, as the scorching light of the royal commission has been shone on this hidden horror, we have listened, we have been shocked and we have believed. I say again: we believe you.

We now accept without question that the horror of child abuse has occurred and that, too often, it was right under our noses. As I speak on this bill, I acknowledge that there has been a societal change in the wake of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, and the change is this: where once we turned our backs, now we look and listen. Where once we heard through a filter of doubt and scepticism, now we hear the full horror of shattered lives. Where once we may have said, 'It's none of my business,' now we know that protecting children is everyone's business. This is a fundamental change that will have a lasting impact on the protection of children in Australia. This change has occurred not because of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse—although the work the royal commission has done has been invaluable—and certainly not because of the institutions who have been shamed during the royal commission. It is squarely because of the bravery of the victims of child sexual abuse who came forward to tell their stories. They came forward even though some of them had told their stories before and not been believed. And some had never before told their stories, not to a single soul. I don't think any of us can understand what courage that takes. I know I can't. The lasting legacy of their courage will be that, when the next child speaks out—and the child after that—they will be believed. We will never again turn our backs as a nation.

The work of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse has been extraordinary. I am very proud to have been a member of the parliament in November 2012 when Prime Minister Gillard announced that she would recommend to the Governor-General that a royal commission be appointed to inquire into institutional responses to child abuse. Her Excellency Quentin Bryce, the then Governor-General, announced in January 2013 that six commissioners, led by Justice Peter McClellan, would undertake the task of conducting the inquiry. I particularly mention Bob Atkinson, the former police commissioner from Queensland, for the great work he did as one of the royal commissioners. The royal commission handed down its final report in December 2017. The commissioners made a total of 409 recommendations. The workload of this royal commission was phenomenal. I thank all of the royal commissioners, and particularly their staff, for their considered work over five years. The horrors they must have waded through will no doubt leave a lasting imprint on all of their lives as well. Carrying that distilled horror and heartache is a great burden for any human, so I thank them again.

The royal commission received 42,041 calls, and 25,964 letters and emails; held 8,013 private sessions; and made 2,575 referrals to authorities, including the police. The royal commission's terms of reference were:

… to inquire into institutional responses to allegations and incidents of child sexual abuse and … what institutions and governments should do to better protect children against child sexual abuse …

The evidence the commission received was shocking, perhaps more so because we have all been part of those institutions that ignored or, even worse, covered up the abuse. The institutions that were referred to the commission including schools, childcare centres, sporting and recreation clubs, religious institutions, youth detention facilities and the armed forces. In one way or another we have all been involved in at least one of these institutions. We were there while these horrific crimes were taking place. We didn't see—or chose not to—the lives being shattered in our midst, the quiet crumbling of spirits right alongside us.

For the victims the impact of child sexual abuse can be devastating, life-changing, life-limiting and, sadly, as we have heard too often, life-ending. It is especially important to look beyond the shattered husks of lives gutted before they had even begun. When a child is abused at school, they won't want to go to school. That's not too hard to understand. Their education has been stolen from them along with their childhood. Without an education, and suffering from extreme trauma, their capacity to work is reduced, and it is not surprising that victims of child sexual abuse can then as adolescents become vulnerable to the call of criminal activity. We have to acknowledge with much sympathy the path that the survivors have been led or pushed down. Where survivors have been led into crime and convicted, they have taken responsibility and paid their debt to society, just like everyone else who is convicted of a crime. The government has sought in this bill to place restrictions on the redress that can be accessed by survivors who have a criminal history. I believe this is wrong and deeply unfair. The redress scheme is an important step in the healing process for survivors.

There are three elements of the redress scheme: it will provide a monetary payment, access to counselling and psychological services, and the opportunity to receive an apology from a representative of the institution responsible for the abuse. Applicants who accept an offer for redress will be required to waive their civil law rights against the responsible institution by signing a deed of release, support services and legal services will be provided to applicants throughout the redress scheme process, and financial advice will be provided to applicants who accept an offer of redress. I have some concerns about the proposed scheme contained in the bills. There must be sufficient support services available for the survivors to access, wherever they are living and no matter what language they speak. The bill gives applicants six months to decide whether or not to accept an offer of redress. The royal commission recommended they be given a year to make this decision. For survivors this will be an emotional and overwhelming process. Applicants are allowed only one application to the scheme. There is no policy rationale for limiting the time for applicants to make this important decision. I am concerned that rushing survivors into making this once-only decision may not be in their best interests.

See this speech in context