Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

(6)    Schedule 1, page 20 (after line 26), after item 16, insert:

16AA At the end of subsection 63C(1)

Add:

     ; and (d)   the cooling-off period referred to in subsection (1AA) has expired.

16AB After subsection 63C(1)

Insert:

         (1AA)   A cooling-off period is a period of seven days after a parenting plan is made, revoked or varied during which either party may advise in writing that he or she does not wish to make, revoke or vary the parenting plan and accordingly, the parenting plan is not made, revoked or varied, as the case may be.

(7)   Schedule 1, page 21 (after line 36), after item 17, insert:

17A Section 63D

Repeal the section, substitute:

63D Parenting plan may be varied or revoked by further written agreement

        (1)    A parenting plan may be varied or revoked by agreement in writing between the parties to the plan.

        (2)    Any variation or revocation under subsection (1) takes effect after the cooling-off period has expired.

Labor proposes a cooling-off period of seven days for parenting plans. Parenting plans are simple agreements reached between parents on how they will share parenting responsibilities and parenting time or other issues relating to the care of their children. Under this bill, these plans will have an increased status. They will be able to amend the content of parenting orders, and penalties will flow for breaches of plans. Labor has supported an increased status for parenting plans as part of a package of reforms aimed at encouraging agreements out of court rather than through litigation.

However, if parenting plans are to have a new status, they should also have new safeguards. We need to be certain that parenting plans reflect genuine meetings of mind between parents. We have already persuaded the government to insert a provision that would require parenting plans to be made free from coercion, threat and duress—and I must say that was a welcome position to gain from the government. But it was a bare minimum protection. It was not enough. The government could go further.

We picked up the idea of a cooling-off period from the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. On many issues, the government has made a big deal of accepting the recommendations of that committee but not this one. I am interested to hear from the minister as to why not this one. In our view, a cooling-off period would be a valuable protection against people being bullied, cajoled or rushed into a parenting plan. I have to say that the concept is not new and has been reflected in other places for other reasons, but it is a sensible way for people to be able to draw breath, especially as in this area there is no requirement to receive legal advice before entering a plan.

Aside from providing this level of protection, a cooling-off period should also contribute to improved compliance with parenting plans. As you can readily grasp, if there were not a cooling-off period and one parent immediately regretted a plan, the chances of noncompliance would have to be higher. It certainly would make sense, with all the expense, stress and frustration that noncompliance generates, to have a cooling-off period. It is also a secondary way of reinforcing the point. If you have allowed the cooling-off period to expire, then, even if you are not completely satisfied with it, you have allowed your options to lapse and are more likely, I think, to then stick with the plan.

It should be kept in mind that this would not in any way weaken parenting plans. It does not affect the plans. It does not allow them to be voided or amended unilaterally on a whim. It simply allows a cooling-off period of seven days. That is a very short time in the context of dealing with the period of the rest of your life in which you are going to share a loving relationship with your child—or at least the period until your responsibilities as a parent change somewhat, and you develop a different kind of relationship with your child.

These are not decisions that should be made lightly. They are serious and they do have profound consequences affecting the most important things in people’s lives—their children. As I have said, this is a straightforward, commonsense amendment that had the support of all the coalition members on the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. I am surprised, in truth, that the government will not pick this up. This is not even an amendment that detracts from the way they say the bill should operate. It just allows parties to have that short pause as a cooling-off period before the parenting plan commences. I commend the amendment to the chamber.