Senate debates

Monday, 18 March 2024

Bills

National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Amendment Bill 2023; Second Reading

7:11 pm

Photo of Claire ChandlerClaire Chandler (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the opposition, I rise to make a short contribution this evening on the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Amendment Bill 2023. Whilst the coalition will ultimately support this bill, we will be moving an amendment in the committee stage of consideration of the bill to omit part 2 of schedule 1 from this bill. Part 2 of schedule 1 makes changes to the special assessment process to specific classes of serious offences and removes the existing restrictions that apply to those people on applying under the Redress Scheme from jail.

The National Redress Scheme, established under the former coalition government, continues to provide support to those who have suffered from institutionalised child sexual abuse. The scheme recognises the suffering survivors have experienced and accepts that these events occurred and that institutions must take responsibility for this abuse. The scheme is the most significant step in going part of the way to addressing the wrongs of the past and providing a just response to survivors. We also recognise that it's an important step and has been an important step for many towards healing. The scheme also ensures governments and institutions take steps to safeguard against these crimes ever being repeated in the future. It is intended to provide a survivor with the means to access a sense of justice through financial redress and other restorative supports. It is intended to be faster, simpler and less distressing for survivors and to provide governments and institutions with the means to deliver swift justice to those survivors.

When the scheme was established under the former coalition government, there were some limitations for people who had committed the most serious of crimes. For example, if a person is convicted of an offence which receives a custodial sentence of five years or more in jail, the operator, as defined under the act, may determine that the person is entitled to redress if providing redress to the person would not bring the scheme into disrepute or adversely affect public confidence in the scheme. When making this determination at present, the operator takes into account any relevant information, such as advice given by the relevant attorney-general and the nature of the offence for which that person has received the custodial sentence of five years or more. The coalition does not see any need to change this current arrangement. Changes to review processes to allow new information to be provided as part of a request for review of a determination and consideration by independent decision-makers should be as part of the review process.

The bill that we're debating this evening changes eligibility for prisoners by removing the restriction on people making an application for redress from jail. The bill seeks to reduce unnecessary delays in the progression of applications by making changes to the process for people with serious convictions applying for redress, thus reducing the number of people required to go through the special assessment process. The changes aim to reduce the incidence of applications that undergo special assessment, focusing only on those sentenced to five years or more in jail for offences such as unlawful killing, sexual offences or terrorism, or in cases where there is a risk to the scheme's integrity. The bill makes changes to the scheme's protected information framework by introducing additional authorisations for disclosure of protected information. The bill allows finalised applications for redress to be reassessed when an institution identified in the application has subsequently joined the scheme or been listed under funder of last resort arrangements. Finally, the bill implements technical amendments to align funder of last resort rounding provisions to other areas of the redress act, addressing drafting inconsistencies within the funder of last resort provisions and to promote consistency in drafting.

The National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Amendment Bill 2023 shows this government's tendency to be lenient on crime by benefiting, or proposing to benefit, individuals with serious criminal convictions by, essentially, offering a fast-tracked redress process. Under this bill those who receive a jail sentence of five years or more would be eligible to apply for redress without having to go through the existing special assessment process. Under this bill, only those sentenced to five years or more for offences such as unlawful killing, sexual offences or terrorism, or cases where it's deemed that the scheme's integrity would be questioned—and we do not for a moment doubt that—would have to go through the special assessment process. But, outside of those crimes, any other individuals receiving a jail sentence of five years or more would be eligible to apply for redress without having to go through the existing special assessment arrangement.

We have a proposal now from the government to change this assessment process for people who have been jailed for more than five years outside of those crimes that I mentioned. Let's be frank: in this country, to be jailed for more than five years means that, by definition, we are talking about some very serious crimes. But, in effect, we are concerned that the government is accepting that, for a certain class of crimes, we shouldn't be changing that process—that certain class of crimes here being unlawful killings, sexual offences and terrorism. We understand the need to do that but, again, the concern is whether or not this has been consistently applied across the board. On the one hand the government is accepting that it is important for the special assessment process to be maintained for the integrity of the scheme and for common decency, but for other classes of crimes we're happy to let open the doors for everybody else.

So, as I foreshadowed in making my contribution this evening on behalf of the shadow minister and on behalf of the opposition, the coalition will ultimately be supporting this bill in its passage through the Senate, but we will move amendments in the committee of the whole stage to deal with some of the issues that I have outlined this evening, particularly an amendment to omit part 2 of schedule 1 from the bill.

Comments

No comments