House debates
Wednesday, 10 May 2006
Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Bill 2006
Consideration of Senate Message
Consideration resumed from 9 May.
Senate’s amendments—
(1) Schedule 1, item 3, page 4 (after line 22), at the end of the definition of family violence, add:
Note: A person reasonably fears for, or reasonably is apprehensive about, his or her personal wellbeing or safety in particular circumstances if a reasonable person in those circumstances would fear for, or be apprehensive about, his or her personal wellbeing or safety.
(2) Schedule 1, item 43, page 33 (lines 11 to 17), omit subitems (1) and (2), substitute:
(1) Section 60CC of the new Act applies to orders made on or after commencement.
(2) The amendments made by items 13, 29 and 30 of this Schedule apply to parenting orders made on or after commencement.
(3) Schedule 1, item 43, page 33 (lines 26 and 27), omit subitem (6), substitute:
(6) The amendment made by item 22 of this Schedule applies to parenting orders made on or after commencement.
(4) Schedule 1, item 43, page 34 (lines 1 to 3), omit subitem (8), substitute:
(8) Sections 65DAA, 65DAB, 65DAC and 65DAE of the new Act apply to parenting orders made on or after commencement.
(5) Schedule 1, Part 2, page 34 (after line 7), at the end of the Part, add:
44 Grounds for discharging or varying parenting orders
The amendments made by this Schedule are taken not to constitute changed circumstances that would justify making an order to discharge or vary, or to suspend or revive the operation of, some or all of a parenting order that was made before commencement.
Note: For the need for changed circumstances, see Rice and Asplund (1979) FLC 90-725.
9:13 am
Philip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I move:
That the amendments be agreed to.
The Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Bill 2006 is a very important bill because it complements the most significant changes to family law in almost 30 years. It is about changing the culture and the way in which family law issues are dealt with, hopefully to ensure that the great majority of them will be dealt with in less adversarial ways. The family relationship centres are a very important part of that initiative. This bill, as originally proposed and as amended, seeks to reinforce those changes that we expect will lead to that change of culture. In that context, I thank the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee for their efforts in releasing a comprehensive report on this bill on 24 March. They did endeavour to expedite their considerations so that the bill could be considered when we last sat. It is only because the House was not sitting when the Senate completed its deliberations that we are dealing with this matter today.
The government will formally respond to the report, and that will be tabled shortly. We did carefully consider the recommendations of the committee, and as a result made a number of amendments. The Senate amendments substantially implement three of the committee’s recommendations. The other recommendations that the government has adopted do not require a legislative response. Those the government has not accepted revisited issues considered by previous committees of this House. Those views of the committee of this House were, in the government’s opinion, to be preferred.
The Senate amendments also clarify the government’s intention that the bill is not intended to operate so as to allow previously resolved parenting orders to be reconsidered purely on the basis of changes to the legislation. That does not preclude examination if there have been legitimate changes in circumstances. It is important that the legislation is in place prior to the opening of the first family relationship centres in July this year. That underpins the government’s reforms to the services, as I mentioned. So I look forward to the passage of these amendments today.
Amendment (1) adds a note to the definition of family violence to clarify that the tests to determine reasonableness of a fear or apprehension of violence takes into account the circumstances of a person who is relying on a reasonable fear or apprehension of violence. Amendments (2) to (4) address concerns that the bill would not apply to court applications made prior to the commencement of the bill. Amendment (5) clarifies the government’s intention that schedule 1 of the bill is not to operate so as to allow previously resolved parenting orders to be considered purely on the basis of changes to the legislation.
I commend the amendments to the House and thank all those members who have contributed to positive deliberations on this bill.
9:16 am
Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Labor is happy to support the amendments that the government has flagged. The Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Bill 2006 has had a long and torrid life, going through both this House and the other place as well as having two committees look into it. I do not intend to go through in any detail the issues that have previously been raised in this House, other than to flag that we are grateful that the government has picked up a number of amendments that have been recommended by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, by the Labor Party as the opposition and by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee.
There are a number of recommendations that have not been picked up. I note that the government has been happy to pick and choose when it is interested in listening to recommendations from the committees and when it is not. I think it is unfortunate that a number of other issues that have been flagged here before have not been picked up—those dealing with the definition of violence, the cooling off period, the use of ‘equal’ or ‘joint’ in the legislation and the issues that the Senate committee picked up in respect of false allegations and costs.
However, we welcome this broad package. It has been a long time coming. We hold the same hopes that the government holds that this will provide some long-term relief to families who are going through family breakdown. We hope that the family relationship centres program will be as successful as the government maintains. We will certainly be doing our part to make sure that these changes will provide significant relief for families. We will continue to keep an eye on the issues that we think may have some negative impact. No doubt we will be back in this place debating matters further if our fears are held up. We hope that is not the case and we are happy to support the amendments that have been moved in the House today.
David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The question is that the amendments be agreed to.
Question agreed to.