Mr KIELY - 2004-08-26
The shadow Attorney-General has been busy promoting the CLP opposition’s plan to reduce sentences for people convicted of child sex offences …
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member well knows, as do his colleagues, that he cannot make an allegation like that, except in the form of a substantive motion. He is wrong, he should withdraw it.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, will you rephrase your question so it does not use allegations against a member?
Mr KIELY: Madam Speaker …
Mr Dunham: So it does not tell lies, would be good. Rephrase it so it is factual.
Mr KIELY: Well, what are you saying?
Mr Dunham: It has to be right, mate.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member for Drysdale accused my colleague of telling lies, and I ask that he withdraw that comment.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, can you rephrase the question so we do not have this confusion?
Mr Dunham: He can do it by way of personal explanation.
Mr KIELY: No. I am not going to be called a liar in this House by you.
Mr Dunham: Well, there is a good reason I called you a liar.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Drysdale, if you did so, then I would like you to withdraw that comment.
Mr DUNHAM: I just …
Madam SPEAKER: Just withdraw.
Mr DUNHAM: Can I complete …
Madam SPEAKER: I know what you are going to do.
Mr DUNHAM: Okay, if you know what I was going to say, there is no need to say it, I guess.
Madam SPEAKER: Did you withdraw?
Mr DUNHAM: I do withdraw it, Madam Speaker, wholeheartedly.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you. Member for Sanderson, try again.
Mr KIELY: The CLP shadow Attorney-General has been quoted on the radio as wanting lesser sentencing regimes for …
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! It is untrue. He is not being truthful.
Madam SPEAKER: Are you happy to rectify …
Ms CARNEY: If he insists that he is, then I defy him to provide the evidence. There is none.
Madam SPEAKER: If he has the direct transcript from the …
Members interjecting.
Mr KIELY: I will try it again, Madam Speaker, because it so offends the shadow Attorney-General …
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! When the member for Sanderson, along with his colleagues, lie, yes, I am offended.
Mr KIELY: I am not lying, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, I know, but I am trying to get you to ask your question in such a way that it does not offend the member. Can we just have the question?
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! It is still on the Parliamentary Record that the member for Araluen has called my colleague a liar, and she has to withdraw.
Madam SPEAKER: Well, I think she did say when; she did not say he did. Member for Sanderson.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: I will cancel this question if you do not get it right.
Mr KIELY: Madam Speaker, once more - if they do not try to gag me again.
The CLP has very opposing views to that of the government on sentencing of child sex abusers …
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: No, that is not offensive.
Ms Carney: And the truth is?
Madam SPEAKER: I am sorry, resume your seat. There is no point of order.
Ms Carney: They are being as slippery as ever, because it is just untrue.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Araluen, resume your seat.
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: No. Go on, member for Sanderson.
Mr Dunham: Madam Speaker …
Madam SPEAKER: No, I did not acknowledge you.
Mr KIELY: Does the government support the opposition’s push to reduce sentences?
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! There is no push on the part of this opposition to reduce sentences for child abusers, and I ask that the member for Sanderson withdraw his comment.
Madam SPEAKER: I believe the minister can answer the question.
Mr Dunham: Can I ...
Madam SPEAKER: No. I have just given the minister the call.
Mr Dunham: Madam Speaker, it is on an entirely different subject.
Madam SPEAKER: No, I am sorry. We are in the middle of Question Time.
Mr Dunham: Madam Speaker, I am merely referring to a standing order which governs this parliament.
Madam SPEAKER: What are you referring to?
Mr DUNHAM: Standing Order 112 states that questions should not contain statements of fact unless they can be authenticated. The questioner has not authenticated his question. Neither should it ask for hypothetical matter, and the question is offensive on both of those counts.
Madam SPEAKER: If I ruled out all the questions that are asked in this House on those two grounds we probably would not have any questions. Minister, I will allow you to answer the question.
ANSWER
Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is an issue we need to clear up. I would like to touch on some of this, because that was the brunt of the statement that came through. Part of it was during the course of the discussion about the legislative framework that was part of the statement. Our position is, in most cases, people who abuse and violate children deserve lengthier sentences than offenders who commit offences against adult victims because of the exploitation of the vulnerability of the child.
Child abuse is a very broad and general term that could include anything from inappropriate touching to outright rape. Most of the offences exist as offences which could be prosecuted in relation to adult victims as well as child victims. The basic principle is that, where a victim is a child, the penalty should be heavier. This reflects the general community view that violent and/or sexual offences against children are the most serious of crimes. With that community view in mind, last year our government increased sentences for child sex abuse offences. We hope and intend that the increased penalties will send a message to potential offenders that the community will not tolerate sexual interference of children.
In addition to sending this message, the increase in penalties was necessary to achieve another objective: protecting our children from child abusers. As I understand it, the member for Araluen’s primary concern is that a person charged with an offence where the victim is a child is less likely to plead guilty if the maximum sentence for that offence is increased by reference to the fact that the victim is a child ...
Ms Carney: And you agreed to look at it. You gave me an assurance that if that happened you would look at it in 12 months - well founded reservation.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Allow the minister to finish.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: This concern is highly speculative. Evidence does not support this, and it flies in the face of common sense and everyday human experience. The heaviest sentences will, obviously, be handed down to the most serious offences, whether the victim is a child or an adult. The offence that we call rape is one that already attracts an extremely long maximum prison sentence even if the victim is an adult.
Our strategy is aimed at securing a more successful conviction rate in relation to child sexual offence prosecutions. We are introducing new evidentiary provisions that will assist in this regard and protect vulnerable witnesses, particularly children. Our strategy also includes new legislation that will enable us to establish a register to track known sex offenders, preventing them from working with children. The emphasis is on the protection and safeguarding of children. The Martin government stands by our tough laws and tough sentences for child abusers.
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member well knows, as do his colleagues, that he cannot make an allegation like that, except in the form of a substantive motion. He is wrong, he should withdraw it.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, will you rephrase your question so it does not use allegations against a member?
Mr KIELY: Madam Speaker …
Mr Dunham: So it does not tell lies, would be good. Rephrase it so it is factual.
Mr KIELY: Well, what are you saying?
Mr Dunham: It has to be right, mate.
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! The member for Drysdale accused my colleague of telling lies, and I ask that he withdraw that comment.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Sanderson, can you rephrase the question so we do not have this confusion?
Mr Dunham: He can do it by way of personal explanation.
Mr KIELY: No. I am not going to be called a liar in this House by you.
Mr Dunham: Well, there is a good reason I called you a liar.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Member for Drysdale, if you did so, then I would like you to withdraw that comment.
Mr DUNHAM: I just …
Madam SPEAKER: Just withdraw.
Mr DUNHAM: Can I complete …
Madam SPEAKER: I know what you are going to do.
Mr DUNHAM: Okay, if you know what I was going to say, there is no need to say it, I guess.
Madam SPEAKER: Did you withdraw?
Mr DUNHAM: I do withdraw it, Madam Speaker, wholeheartedly.
Madam SPEAKER: Thank you. Member for Sanderson, try again.
Mr KIELY: The CLP shadow Attorney-General has been quoted on the radio as wanting lesser sentencing regimes for …
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! It is untrue. He is not being truthful.
Madam SPEAKER: Are you happy to rectify …
Ms CARNEY: If he insists that he is, then I defy him to provide the evidence. There is none.
Madam SPEAKER: If he has the direct transcript from the …
Members interjecting.
Mr KIELY: I will try it again, Madam Speaker, because it so offends the shadow Attorney-General …
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! When the member for Sanderson, along with his colleagues, lie, yes, I am offended.
Mr KIELY: I am not lying, Madam Speaker.
Madam SPEAKER: Yes, I know, but I am trying to get you to ask your question in such a way that it does not offend the member. Can we just have the question?
Mr HENDERSON: A point of order, Madam Speaker! It is still on the Parliamentary Record that the member for Araluen has called my colleague a liar, and she has to withdraw.
Madam SPEAKER: Well, I think she did say when; she did not say he did. Member for Sanderson.
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: I will cancel this question if you do not get it right.
Mr KIELY: Madam Speaker, once more - if they do not try to gag me again.
The CLP has very opposing views to that of the government on sentencing of child sex abusers …
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: No, that is not offensive.
Ms Carney: And the truth is?
Madam SPEAKER: I am sorry, resume your seat. There is no point of order.
Ms Carney: They are being as slippery as ever, because it is just untrue.
Madam SPEAKER: Member for Araluen, resume your seat.
Mr DUNHAM: A point of order, Madam Speaker!
Madam SPEAKER: No. Go on, member for Sanderson.
Mr Dunham: Madam Speaker …
Madam SPEAKER: No, I did not acknowledge you.
Mr KIELY: Does the government support the opposition’s push to reduce sentences?
Ms CARNEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! There is no push on the part of this opposition to reduce sentences for child abusers, and I ask that the member for Sanderson withdraw his comment.
Madam SPEAKER: I believe the minister can answer the question.
Mr Dunham: Can I ...
Madam SPEAKER: No. I have just given the minister the call.
Mr Dunham: Madam Speaker, it is on an entirely different subject.
Madam SPEAKER: No, I am sorry. We are in the middle of Question Time.
Mr Dunham: Madam Speaker, I am merely referring to a standing order which governs this parliament.
Madam SPEAKER: What are you referring to?
Mr DUNHAM: Standing Order 112 states that questions should not contain statements of fact unless they can be authenticated. The questioner has not authenticated his question. Neither should it ask for hypothetical matter, and the question is offensive on both of those counts.
Madam SPEAKER: If I ruled out all the questions that are asked in this House on those two grounds we probably would not have any questions. Minister, I will allow you to answer the question.
ANSWER
Thank you, Madam Speaker. It is an issue we need to clear up. I would like to touch on some of this, because that was the brunt of the statement that came through. Part of it was during the course of the discussion about the legislative framework that was part of the statement. Our position is, in most cases, people who abuse and violate children deserve lengthier sentences than offenders who commit offences against adult victims because of the exploitation of the vulnerability of the child.
Child abuse is a very broad and general term that could include anything from inappropriate touching to outright rape. Most of the offences exist as offences which could be prosecuted in relation to adult victims as well as child victims. The basic principle is that, where a victim is a child, the penalty should be heavier. This reflects the general community view that violent and/or sexual offences against children are the most serious of crimes. With that community view in mind, last year our government increased sentences for child sex abuse offences. We hope and intend that the increased penalties will send a message to potential offenders that the community will not tolerate sexual interference of children.
In addition to sending this message, the increase in penalties was necessary to achieve another objective: protecting our children from child abusers. As I understand it, the member for Araluen’s primary concern is that a person charged with an offence where the victim is a child is less likely to plead guilty if the maximum sentence for that offence is increased by reference to the fact that the victim is a child ...
Ms Carney: And you agreed to look at it. You gave me an assurance that if that happened you would look at it in 12 months - well founded reservation.
Madam SPEAKER: Order! Allow the minister to finish.
Ms SCRYMGOUR: This concern is highly speculative. Evidence does not support this, and it flies in the face of common sense and everyday human experience. The heaviest sentences will, obviously, be handed down to the most serious offences, whether the victim is a child or an adult. The offence that we call rape is one that already attracts an extremely long maximum prison sentence even if the victim is an adult.
Our strategy is aimed at securing a more successful conviction rate in relation to child sexual offence prosecutions. We are introducing new evidentiary provisions that will assist in this regard and protect vulnerable witnesses, particularly children. Our strategy also includes new legislation that will enable us to establish a register to track known sex offenders, preventing them from working with children. The emphasis is on the protection and safeguarding of children. The Martin government stands by our tough laws and tough sentences for child abusers.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016