Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Siewert may have some more questions, but I will start with government amendment (5). The Democrats agree with the government’s amendment to alter the application of these amendments in schedule 1. We acknowledge these amendments are an attempt to clarify the bill with the aim of preventing further litigation based on the changes in the bill. We agree with the clarification that the changes in the bill will not constitute changed circumstances that will justify the making of a new order when one is already in place, so we support that.

We will not support government amendment (1). The note that is proposed to be added to the definition of family violence by government amendment (1) will not give effect to the recommendation made in the Senate committee report that the test should be the reasonable person in the shoes of the individual. The reference to the note to being fearful about safety in particular circumstances if a reasonable person in those circumstances would be fearful would tend to draw a court’s attention only to the particular circumstances existing at a point in time. The use of the phrase ‘reasonable person’ is also likely to take attention away from the person’s reasonable fear and lead to the construction of a reasonable person that imports societal misconceptions about family violence. We actually think that the note makes this worse and we believe it would be preferable for the Senate to remove it.

On government amendments (2) through to (5), we understand that the government’s intention is to give people the opportunity to avail themselves of the new laws with great haste. However, consistent with our opposition to the government’s introduction of those provisions, we oppose the application of those provisions to parenting orders that have not yet been made but have been applied for. We will oppose government amendments (2), (3) and (4) and are happy to for you, Mr Temporary Chairman, to proceed as suggested in terms of how you put those amendments to the vote.