Dai Le (Fowler, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) to (8), as circulated in my name, together:

(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 4 (line 6), omit "paragraph 60CC(3)(a)", substitute "paragraphs 60CC(3)(a) and (3A)(a)".

(2) Schedule 1, item 6, page 5 (line 7), at the end of subsection 60CC(1), add:

; and (c) if the child is from a culturally and linguistically diverse background—also consider the matters set out in subsection (3A).

(3) Schedule 1, item 6, page 5 (line 12), omit "other", substitute "any other form of".

(4) Schedule 1, item 6, page 5 (line 20), before "capacity", insert "ability and".

(5) Schedule 1, item 6, page 6 (after line 4), after subsection 60CC(3), insert:

Additional considerations right to enjoy child's culture

(3A) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(c), the court must consider the following matters:

(a) the child's right to enjoy the child's culture, by having the opportunity to connect with, and maintain their connection with, members of their family and with their community, culture, country and language;

(b) the likely impact any proposed parenting order under this Part will have on that right.

(6) Schedule 1, item 6, page 6 (line 9), omit "or (3)", substitute ", (3) or (3A)".

(7) Schedule 1, item 8, page 6 (line 16), omit "and (3)", substitute ", (3) and (3A)".

(8) Schedule 1, page 6 (after line 16), after item 8, insert:

8A Paragraph 63E(3)(b)

Omit "and (3)", substitute ", (3) and (3A)".

The Family Law Act is already convoluted and, arguably, distressing enough for those involved. I hope that in bringing forward amendments our aim is ultimately to simplify the processes that are currently in place and reduce adversarial harm, especially for children. Family law is often a complex space, having to deal with people and parents and children who are hurt, emotionally fraught and struggling to hold things together for their children's sake while going through separation. I would like to make my position clear that my view on this bill is not to be taken as favouring mums or dads. This is not the point of this conversation. Children are at the centre of these amendments.

While there are various proposed amendments, I would like to focus on the changes to section 60CC, which are the factors in determining the child's best interest in considering parenting arrangements. Nearly 14 per cent of my Fowler electorate are reported to have been divorced or separated, which is higher than the national average. Therefore, it's important for me to speak on this bill, in particular for an electorate where more than 50 per cent of our population speaks a language other than English. Proposed subsection 60CC(3) is to be introduced specifically to promote the best interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, including giving them the opportunity to connect with and maintain connection to the child's family community, culture, country and language.

These are factors that I strongly resonate with and wholeheartedly support for our Indigenous children. However, I invite the government to give greater consideration to the best interests of children through a multicultural lens. I represent the multicultural heartland of Australia, and many children in my area grow up with a strong sense of cultural identity. However, children who have separated parents from different cultural backgrounds could miss out on this important part of their development. I believe it is in a child's right to grow up knowing their heritage, whether it be learning the language, attending cultural festivities or volunteering with community groups. The court must recognise this as a critical factor.

My other amendments seek to broaden the definition of 'harm' towards a child when a court considers their safety. It's my hope that redefining it as 'other such forms of harm' encapsulates certain behaviours that are inconspicuous and yet insidious.

Furthermore, amendment (4) will ensure the courts consider both ability and capacity for parents to care for a child, particularly as capacity could be far too broad when assessing the suitability of care for a child. In summary, I believe my amendments will safeguard the child's best interests.

See this speech in context