Julian Simmonds (Ryan, Liberal National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I will start where I was cut off. The Labor Party's position on this particular bill is completely out of step with community expectations. Thirty-nine per cent of child sex offenders convicted federally last year didn't spend a single day in jail. The community expect better than that. We, the Morrison government, understand that, and that's why this bill is here—to correct that and to make a difference. For the Labor Party to stand there and for the member for Isaacs to, rather than support this bill, try and give the government a lecture on parliamentary process just shows that their actions do not match their rhetoric.

The member for Fowler also raised a number of issues in defence of Labor's position not to do anything on this particular issue. Even though there were a lot of platitudes—and I accept that Labor's platitudes were heartfelt—the member for Fowler raised the issue that, somehow, mandatory sentencing might remove the incentive for people to cooperate. Well, we know that the legislation deals with that. If he had bothered to read the legislation, rather than simply seeking an arbitrary reason to justify Labor's indefensible position, he would know that. The fact is: this bill retains discretion for the judiciary to reduce a mandatory minimum penalty by up to 25 per cent to allow for recognition of early guilty pleas and cooperation with law enforcement. Quite clearly, there is still an incentive within this bill for people to either plead guilty or to cooperate with law enforcement agencies. There is also significant discretion for the courts remaining in this bill. That is what is going to prevent the spectre that Labor keeps raising—that, somehow, this will lead to a situation where juries are less likely to convict.

Courts will still retain their important power to set non-parole periods for child sex offenders as they see fit. Importantly, law enforcement officers and prosecutors will retain their broad discretions regarding whether or not to charge or prosecute individuals. But the point is that, when these individuals are found to have undertaken these most heinous of acts against children in our community—acts which create victims for life—we will not have the situation that has been the case for the last year, where 39 per cent of perpetrators who were convicted did not spend a day in jail. Their victims, and the victims' families, are affected by these crimes for the rest of their days. The idea that 39 per cent of child sex offenders convicted federally last year didn't spend a single day in jail is so out of step with community expectations that we must seek to rectify it urgently, which is what this bill does.

I'm disappointed that, despite the platitudes, Labor members opposite can't bring themselves to join with the government to take action on this important issue. Our children must be protected from the dangers of sexual abuse. We must do everything in our power that we can to address the inadequacies of our criminal justice system. There must be severe penalties for those individuals who seek to commit these heinous crimes. We on this side of the chamber not only believe this but are willing to act so that we can stand, hand on heart, as fathers and mothers, and say we have done everything to keep our children safe.

Children are among the most vulnerable in the community, and the crimes that this bill deals with are some of the most serious we are faced with. Children are more trusting of the adults around them, and their innocence can, disgustingly, be preyed on. This bill is an example of the government's commitment to protect children from sexual abuse. These offenders are predators—have no doubt about that. For too long, punishments have been inadequate, in the eyes of the community, and grossly below our expectations and the public's.

Just last week in my home town of Brisbane we had a disturbing judgement handed down by the Brisbane District Court. Last December, during the Christmas rush, at a department store in North Lakes, a paedophile by the name of Sterling Free lured a seven-year-old girl away from her mother. He proceeded to take her into bushland, where he sexually assaulted her, before returning her to the store. This is the nightmare of every parent. I am at a loss for words to describe how I feel about such despicable acts, and I am at a loss to think about how a family recovers from something like that. He was sentenced to just eight years in prison, with parole after two. This offender could be back in the Brisbane community in August 2021.

Queenslanders are justifiably outraged, as they expect more from the Queensland state Labor government when it comes to punishing this individual for this disturbing act. I stand with the Minister for Home Affairs, Minister Dutton, who has rightly slammed the sentence as an outrage and called on Queensland's state Labor government to immediately appeal, and to follow the Morrison government's lead and introduce legislation, such as that we have before us, creating minimum mandatory sentences for child sex offenders.

With that in mind, I'm speaking on this bill so we can do what we can in this place to improve the situation. The bill will strengthen Commonwealth laws to provide greater protection of our children and send a strong message, a deterrent, that people, should they choose to act in this way, will be duly punished. The bill does four things to achieve this. It introduces new offences relating to grooming activities and to websites and online platforms designed to host child abuse material. It introduces new aggravated offences for the most horrific types of child abuse engaged in while somebody is outside of Australia, including where the child is subjected to cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment. It implements a range of presumptions against bail and presumptions for imprisonment, meaning it is more likely that child sex offenders will go to prison and will stay there longer, and it will be harder for them to get bail. It introduces mandatory minimum sentences for the most serious child sex offences and for those who are repeat offenders.

Unfortunately, as technology continues to improve and enhance the way we live, so, too, can it be harmful in the wrong hands. Importantly, this reform seeks to bolster the tools available to combat this increasingly changing form of child sexual abuse. In an age where it is now standard for children to be online for schoolwork or at home, particularly at an increasingly young age, we must do all we can to protect them against emerging threats. Perverse individuals could be lurking at the other end of a keyboard. Online services making a profit from making or facilitating the exchange of child abuse material is a sickening and growing problem. Currently, those behind such acts can only be prosecuted where it can be proven they are themselves also accessing child abuse material or encouraging others to do so. This bill will introduce a new offence, allowing a sentence of up to 20 years in jail, that ensures that providers of these services are rightly held to account for the damage they are doing to our community.

As I said, in the last financial year 39 per cent of Commonwealth child sex offenders walked away with a non-custodial sentence. This is not an acceptable figure. The bill, I am pleased to say, will dramatically improve judicial outcomes. Mandatory minimum sentences will apply to child sex offences that attract the highest penalties, particularly to reoffenders who have previously been convicted of separate child sex offences. The bill introduces minimum five- to seven-year terms for the most serious child sex offenders. Recidivists will face from one to four years across a spectrum at the Commonwealth level. This, together with a new presumption in favour of cumulative sentences for multiple child sex offences, will see sentences that will adequately reflect the seriousness of the offending that has occurred.

Bail is another issue in these cases. This bill will introduce a presumption against bail for those who have reoffended. In consideration of bail for repeat child sex offenders or those charged with the most serious of offences, there will be an expectation that bail should be refused on the grounds of community safety. Nothing is a bigger priority for me in this place than ensuring my community is safe. I'm a dad, a parent, with a two-year-old son, and I will do everything I can to ensure that he and the other children in Ryan are safe from predators like the ones targeted and addressed in this bill.

I will circle back to finish where I started, and that is that it is so disappointing to me and the other members of the Morrison government that this bill does not have bipartisan support. I've spent the last few minutes outlining what's in this bill, and I'm yet to see anything that could be disagreed with, quite frankly. What is the argument against from the Labor members—that those who commit these hideous crimes shouldn't go to jail for longer; that they shouldn't go to jail full stop, as opposed to what is currently happening; that there shouldn't be a presumption that bail is denied so that the community can be kept safe in these circumstances? I've heard a lot of words from members opposite about standing up for the principle of no mandatory sentencing. But why aren't they standing up for the principle that our children should be safe? We in the Morrison government certainly are. We're doing it with actions, through this bill, not with words. So, when Labor members talk about standing up for a principle, remember that they're standing up for the principle of process rather than for the principle of keeping our kids safe, as we here in the Morrison government are doing.

There are perfect examples of where mandatory sentencing has worked. When the Western Australian state Liberal government introduced mandatory sentencing provisions for assaults against police and other officers—again, serious offences within our community where there is a community expectation that they be dealt with in a significant way—there was a 28 per cent drop in assaults against police in just a 12-month period. This demonstrates that, when these criminals, these evil individuals, are forced to confront the fact that their fate will be a minimum of five to eight years in jail, this will be a deterrent to their committing those acts. If even one of these kinds of heinous acts is prevented thanks to this legislation, it will have been well worth it.

I have faith in our judicial system. That's why I'm pleased that this bill still allows flexibility for judges to make decisions and for prosecutors about whether or not they prosecute a case, and makes allowances for people who work with prosecutors and police for intelligence gathering. But, at the end of the day, I'm prouder still of the fact that this bill, if passed by the House, will ensure that people who are convicted of these most heinous acts are sent to jail, and sent to jail for a reasonable period of time, in line with community standards.

See this speech in context