Milton Dick (Oxley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Amendment (Technical Amendments) Bill 2020. I'll be offering my remarks today for the survivors and some of the groups I've had the privilege to meet. I say it's a privilege because I want to start my remarks today by acknowledging the bravery of so many Australians who have spoken out and given voice to many in the community who don't have a voice. When we sit in this chamber and have the honour of representing our communities and all Australians, I think sometimes we forget that one of our primary focuses as members of parliament is to be a voice for those who don't have a voice. I am so pleased that the member for Barton, the shadow minister, is here today to support my remarks. I acknowledge her amendment, but not only that; I acknowledge her lifelong commitment to giving voice to those who don't have a voice.

I know the speakers today have covered a lot of ground and it's important that we outline exactly why we are supporting these important amendments today. This is the first week of parliament's return. I attended the church service on Tuesday morning and heard sermons and readings from the Old Testament and the New Testament about hope—hope for 2021. I don't think it's a bridge too far if I say that the hope of survivors is that their voices are heard and the justice that they deserve is delivered in 2021. I pledge today to offer my continuing support to all of those Australians who have suffered so much and have bravely spoken.

As a member of the Joint Select Committee on Implementation of the National Redress Scheme, it's been an honour to hear the evidence from so many people—so many groups and so many different Australians—as they gave voice to what they have lived through. I feel extremely blessed to have had a comfortable and safe upbringing, with loving parents, in a safe and comfortable family environment. One of the things I have been most challenged by was listening to all of the evidence that was presented to us. The words that I speak in this chamber can't do justice to what people have been through. So I really was very, very keen to speak on today's legislation and to offer a couple of suggestions from my humble position as the member for Oxley.

We know that the bill is largely administrative in relation to the operation of the National Redress Scheme. It has a whole range of mechanisms which we of course support and endorse. But we don't think it goes far enough. We'll be making suggestions for practical and ongoing solutions, through the amendment process, that I hope many on the other side will agree with. I'm fairly confident they will agree. It's about having the courage of their convictions and joining with Labor to support the practical and sensible amendments that we're putting forward, such as increasing the maximum payment to $200,000, as recommended by the royal commission; ensuring that prior payments are not indexed when calculating a redress payment; ensuring that prior payments which do not relate to institutional child sexual abuse are not deducted from redress; introducing an advanced payment scheme for elderly and ill applicants similar to the one, we heard, is operating in Scotland; ensuring that governments act as funders of last resort for all institutions with no formal links; guaranteeing that the review of an offer of redress will not result in an offer being reduced; and providing ongoing psychological counselling and support for recipients of redress. What does that all mean? It means that survivors have access to support, that survivors have timely advice and information and also that the pain and trauma that they have gone through is recognised. Our amendments also require the minister to publicly name an institution and cease any Commonwealth funding; to remove the charitable and tax deductibility status of an institution—there was some debate about that for a while, and we did see the government acknowledge that; and to process applications as though an institution is part of the scheme and levy the institution for the cost of redress if it does not join the scheme within 12 months.

As we've heard from the member for McEwen, I really want to ask all members of the parliament to join with Labor members to ensure that these practical and sensible amendments can be delivered.

I want to acknowledge and recognise one of my constituents who contacted me. For the purpose of this debate, I will call the constituent Carl. Carl was in his late 50s and contacted my office recently, distressed and frustrated, having been told, back at the start of the National Redress Scheme in July 2018, that he could receive compensation and support within six months. Carl has had to wait for over three years, and he still hasn't heard about the progress of his compensation. Carl is one story, but every story is important. They've had to, obviously, live with the psychological and physical trauma for so many years from a system that badly let them down and, to be honest, they now feel that this government is letting them down. He was told that one of the two organisations would be in contact with him and provide him with the opportunity of help with access to the compensation. Both organisations have made no contact with Carl, although he's repeatedly tried to reach out over the last two years. So think about that. Think about someone on their own, not sure of the system, perhaps struggling with a number of social and health issues, having to try and negotiate with and talk to the institutions and some organisations that they're fearful of. That's one brave Australian, if you ask me. One of those two organisations haven't even signed up to the scheme.

I believe it's absolutely the government's responsibility to ensure the welfare and mental and physical wellbeing of all the Australian people. Our amendments don't solve every single problem, but what the amendments we are asking the government to support tonight do is ensure that those stories are addressed, that the redress the government promised is delivered and that the redress that survivors called for and fought for is delivered. I think they deserve nothing less.

There are a number of other issues I want to touch on tonight—just some practical advice, information and evidence that I have picked up during my work on this issue with the committee from some of the survivors and some of the organisations that I have heard from. This includes practical things, like the letter of offer and correspondence. I spoke with the shadow minister today about this. Currently, this can only be mailed out, not emailed. There's some argument as to why that would be the case. But, when you think about it in terms of how we do our tax, about myGov or about Medicare claimants—if you're living in supported or shared accommodation, you may not have access to your own mail. I won't get into the arguments about Australia Post; that's a separate argument. There is no mechanism for people who, for example, are worried about people reading their mail. I understand that some older Australians or other people are uncomfortable with that. But what I would like from the bureaucrats that are listening to this tonight and from the minister who is monitoring my speech in their office not far from here is a commitment that, for people who want that option, it could be provided to them safely and securely. It may not sound like the biggest issue in Australia, but the people that I've spoken to who are fearful about government and normally fearful about mail because it may be a bill or it may be bad news need another form of communication. When I questioned the department about this, they said that it was a good idea and they were looking into it. I really hope they are. Sometimes you hear government bureaucrats say these things and you don't hear much about it again. So tonight, in the Australian parliament, I'm just asking that, if you get one thing out of my speech tonight, it's that that becomes a practice so that people can have that practical advice. When I've spoken to survivors, they're fearful, waiting for the letter. We've just heard about my constituent who I've named Carl being worried about what was going to be in the letter. He hasn't got the offer just yet. For those people who are worried about what's going to be in the letter and whether it will be bad news, I just ask that an electronic process be considered.

There's also counselling and support for family members. This is another big issue that I have spoken to survivors about. As one survivor said to me, 'It really is a team effort, getting to the end of getting an offer.' It's a struggle; it's a battle—all of these words are used. Normally, if you're lucky, you'll have a team and a supportive family; not everyone does, but a number of survivors rely heavily on their carers and supporters, so I'd like to see more support for family members so that maybe they are not impacted. It is that team effort that survivors rely on, so I would call on the minister and the government to show more support for family members connected to survivors and, following on from that, counselling services as well. You cannot access specialist trauma counselling that takes you on the journey and builds the background, rapport and understanding of different needs. Instead, some survivors are referred to a small list of providers. That means they have to explain the situation and why they're calling. I think this needs to be a streamlined process in terms of offering support and counselling.

I see the member for Lingiari here. I can only imagine what it's like in remote and regional communities, where it is another step further, where those options aren't available. I know we've had our challenges with COVID, and, for survivors, it's been another layer they've had to deal with, but if we can look at how to re-imagine and deliver counselling support services, it would go a long way.

We know the numbers are way down on where they should be in terms of the 60,000 survivors. We know that we are behind on where we should be. I think that we are forming some practical suggestions tonight. I've offered my own suggestions that I hope the government and the minister will follow up. There are a whole range of issues that I know we'll continue to deal with. But I conclude my remarks tonight by saying to all of the survivors and all of the support people around those survivors: We're not going to forget you. We will not leave you behind. If I have anything to do with it, I'll continue to speak out, and I'll continue to make sure that your voices are heard.

See this speech in context