Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Minister for Urban Infrastructure and Cities) Share this | Hansard source

Let me begin by thanking all of those in this chamber who've contributed to the debate on the Enhancing Online Safety (Non-consensual Sharing of Intimate Images) Bill 2018. It is pleasing that there is bipartisan support for this piece of legislation, although I could not help noticing, when listening to the debate, some rather misleading statements coming from the other side of the chamber—an assertion that the government had 'backflipped' in relation to bringing forward additional criminal penalties and an assertion that Labor had provided leadership by promising to legislate criminal penalties within 100 days of being elected.

We do know that Labor is the 'gonna' party. Labor's always 'gonna' fix it; they're always 'gonna' get it done. They were 'gonna' deliver a National Broadband Network, but it was a chaotic mess. They were 'gonna' have a national pink batts scheme; we know what a disaster that was. They were 'gonna' end the double drop-off—Mr Deputy Speaker, you'd remember that one—and they didn't do well there either. The fact is, Labor is the 'gonna' party; the coalition is the party that gets it done. When it comes to enhancing online safety in relation to the non-consensual sharing of intimate images, we are getting it done.

Let's be clear on the issue of civil penalties versus criminal penalties. The government stood ready to legislate a civil penalty scheme in February, and we said at the same time that we wanted to separately examine the introduction of criminal penalties. In our view, it would have been better, in the interests of victims of the non-consensual sharing of intimate images, of revenge porn—for people who'd been subject to this terrible treatment, this terrible attack on their dignity and on their self-esteem—to legislate the civil penalty provisions. Had that happened, they would have been in force now for several months. They would have been delivering active protection to victims of this conduct—practical protection—for several months. Regrettably, thanks to Labor's political grandstanding, victims have had to wait. That, I think, is a matter for regret. I'd say to the other side of the House: let's remember that we're here to serve the Australian people, including those who are victims of revenge porn, rather than scoring political points.

The Turnbull government, by contrast, has worked methodically through this issue, making sure that criminal provisions are properly developed, that they are based upon the outcomes that victims want to see. It is detailed work, and we've done that detailed work. That stands in contrast to grandiose but ultimately empty claims from the other side of the chamber. It has been common ground, rightly, amongst all participants in this debate to say that Australians are of course immersing themselves in the online world through social networking sites, online games, smartphones and tablet. That, on balance, delivers enormous social benefits. The internet is a vital tool for education and for research. It has great capacity to provide entertainment and social interaction. But it can also be used for purposes that are harmful, purposes that can have very tragic consequences.

That's why the government has brought forward this bill, which reflects the government's ongoing commitment to keeping Australians safe online and sends a clear message to all Australians that the non-consensual sharing of intimate images is unacceptable in our society. This bill creates a prohibition against the non-consensual posting or threat to post an intimate image on a social media service, on a relevant electronic service such as email and text messaging or on a designated internet service, and that includes websites and peer-to-peer file-sharing services. The bill establishes a complaints and objection system to be administered by the eSafety Commissioner whereby victims or persons authorised on behalf of victims will be able to lodge a complaint directly to the eSafety Commissioner where there is reason to believe that an intimate image has been posted or there has been a threat for it to be posted without consent. The bill will facilitate the removal of an image where a person initially consented to an image being shared but has subsequently changed their mind and now wishes to have the image removed. People in this situation will be able to lodge an objection notice with the commissioner. The ability to take down intimate images quickly is a primary concern of victims and of support services.

The bill will introduce a civil penalty regime to be enforced by the eSafety Commissioner. Penalties of up to $105,000 for individuals and up to $525,000 for corporations can be incurred for a breach of the prohibition or a failure to comply with the removal notice or other remedial direction issued by the eSafety Commissioner.

In the Senate, the bill was amended by the inclusion of provisions to amend the Criminal Code 1995 to create new criminal offences for the non-consensual sharing of intimate images. The government carefully examined the provisions moved by the Centre Alliance party in the Senate, and, through that examination, we identified a range of technical issues with the operations of the amendments and inconsistencies with the definitions and provisions in the civil penalty regime currently in the bill.

Today, therefore, the government will move an amendment to the bill which retains the intent of the Centre Alliance amendments to criminalise the non-consensual sharing of intimate images but does so in a way that is more effective and more appropriate for the criminal justice system. This amendment creates two new aggravated offences in the Criminal Code that deal specifically with the non-consensual sharing of private sexual material and attract significantly higher penalties. The special aggravated offence sends a very clear message: if a perpetrator has been issued three or more civil penalty orders under the civil penalty regime established by the bill and still does not get the message that image based abuse has serious consequences, the court will have the discretion to impose a maximum penalty of up to seven years imprisonment.

This bill demonstrates that the government and Australian society as a whole will not tolerate the sharing of intimate images without consent. This government is serious about protecting Australians online. This bill has been developed in consultation with many stakeholders, including women's safety organisations, mental health experts, schools, education departments, victims, the eSafety Commissioner and members of the government's Online Safety Consultative Working Group. Again, I thank all who have participated in this debate, and I call on all in the chamber to support the bill.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

See this speech in context