Ms CARNEY - 2007-10-16
In a media release yesterday, your Attorney-General announced changes to the Domestic Violence Act which included mandatory sentencing for guilty offenders. Your Attorney-General said in his media release:
He said that the reforms were:
Why did you refuse to extend the protections to include mandatory reporting of domestic violence so that more women could actually be protected and more offenders could be brought to justice?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the issue of mandatory reporting of domestic violence is a complex one, and one this government is looking at very closely. It has both positives and negatives. We are listening to expertise from both sides: some say we should have mandatory reporting; and others say that we should not. The Attorney-General has had more discussions about this, and I will refer the question to him for some of the detail.
It is not something that I reject. We will have consultation on it, but I want to listen carefully to our professionals to ensure that if we do pursue mandatory reporting of domestic violence incidents, it doesn’t result in people not presenting for the assistance they need.
It is a complex issue; it is not one that this government is not going to move on, but we need to understand it to ensure that there are not negatives, and listen to those who work in the field for the best advice that we can take to tackle the insidiousness of domestic violence and support those who are victims.
For another part of the answer, I will refer the question to the Attorney-General.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her question. It is a critical question about domestic violence and how we on top of it.
I was interested that in all of the consultations that have gone on about reform of domestic violence legislation, this question of mandatory reporting was not addressed in all of the discussion papers and consultation that went out. Only when I got to it and thought: ‘This really is a central question and we do need to address it’. We did not really have time to get proper consultation in as comprehensive a fashion as I and the government would like before the time for this bill. We committed to have these amendments to the Domestic Violence Act go in before the end of the year, and we need to introduce that tomorrow.
Like the Chief Minister, I am not opposed in principle to the question, but we need to understand the risks and exposures that it opens up. For example, we know that Tasmania passed similar legislation through the House but have not commenced it. They have not commenced it on the grounds of anxiety about whether they have enough police coverage in all of the towns, villages and residential areas around Tasmania to ensure that once mandatory reporting is in, there is enough protection, that they have covered all the gaps to ensure that either the victim is not placed at further risk and in an invidious position as a result of the perpetrator finding out that the person has gone to a health clinic or doctor and there has been mandatory reporting.
I mention that because if Tasmania has those concerns in a much smaller geographic sense than the Northern Territory, it does not have the spread of small and scattered populations as we do with vast areas not policed, notwithstanding that has been strengthened as a result of federal intervention and the efforts of this government as well. That would be one issue that we do need to understand. We need to know what the gaps are, what is required to close those gaps and reduce that exposure so that we could introduce a principle of mandatory reporting.
‘What do you report?’ is a question that people ask. Are we talking about physical abuse, which is quite visible, and what levels of surety are given? These are quite subjective calls that have to be made by professionals. What about economic abuse in the sense of a bread winner not sharing the resources with the family support person? What about intimidation and threats and things like that?
There are a number of issues still to work through. It is fair to say that there are divergent views from within our agencies. It is also true to say that Health has gone a long way with training and counselling and giving those people at the front end who have to deal with this out in the field stronger counselling skills and stronger skills for recognition of what might be domestic violence.
That takes us a way. Does it take us far enough? That is part of all of the questions that we are seeking answers to now. It will be into the new year before I would be satisfied that we have all of the views back from all of the people to whom we need to speak to fully understand the question, fully understand the risks and exposures at which we might place people at, and what we need to do in terms of resources to close that gap, to be comforted enough that we would not be putting people further at risk as a result of mandatory reporting.
It is a very open question. It is a principle that has support, but needs further understanding.
- Victims of domestic violence deserve to be protected.
He said that the reforms were:
- … about protecting the most vulnerable members of society …
Why did you refuse to extend the protections to include mandatory reporting of domestic violence so that more women could actually be protected and more offenders could be brought to justice?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, the issue of mandatory reporting of domestic violence is a complex one, and one this government is looking at very closely. It has both positives and negatives. We are listening to expertise from both sides: some say we should have mandatory reporting; and others say that we should not. The Attorney-General has had more discussions about this, and I will refer the question to him for some of the detail.
It is not something that I reject. We will have consultation on it, but I want to listen carefully to our professionals to ensure that if we do pursue mandatory reporting of domestic violence incidents, it doesn’t result in people not presenting for the assistance they need.
It is a complex issue; it is not one that this government is not going to move on, but we need to understand it to ensure that there are not negatives, and listen to those who work in the field for the best advice that we can take to tackle the insidiousness of domestic violence and support those who are victims.
For another part of the answer, I will refer the question to the Attorney-General.
Mr STIRLING (Justice and Attorney-General): Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her question. It is a critical question about domestic violence and how we on top of it.
I was interested that in all of the consultations that have gone on about reform of domestic violence legislation, this question of mandatory reporting was not addressed in all of the discussion papers and consultation that went out. Only when I got to it and thought: ‘This really is a central question and we do need to address it’. We did not really have time to get proper consultation in as comprehensive a fashion as I and the government would like before the time for this bill. We committed to have these amendments to the Domestic Violence Act go in before the end of the year, and we need to introduce that tomorrow.
Like the Chief Minister, I am not opposed in principle to the question, but we need to understand the risks and exposures that it opens up. For example, we know that Tasmania passed similar legislation through the House but have not commenced it. They have not commenced it on the grounds of anxiety about whether they have enough police coverage in all of the towns, villages and residential areas around Tasmania to ensure that once mandatory reporting is in, there is enough protection, that they have covered all the gaps to ensure that either the victim is not placed at further risk and in an invidious position as a result of the perpetrator finding out that the person has gone to a health clinic or doctor and there has been mandatory reporting.
I mention that because if Tasmania has those concerns in a much smaller geographic sense than the Northern Territory, it does not have the spread of small and scattered populations as we do with vast areas not policed, notwithstanding that has been strengthened as a result of federal intervention and the efforts of this government as well. That would be one issue that we do need to understand. We need to know what the gaps are, what is required to close those gaps and reduce that exposure so that we could introduce a principle of mandatory reporting.
‘What do you report?’ is a question that people ask. Are we talking about physical abuse, which is quite visible, and what levels of surety are given? These are quite subjective calls that have to be made by professionals. What about economic abuse in the sense of a bread winner not sharing the resources with the family support person? What about intimidation and threats and things like that?
There are a number of issues still to work through. It is fair to say that there are divergent views from within our agencies. It is also true to say that Health has gone a long way with training and counselling and giving those people at the front end who have to deal with this out in the field stronger counselling skills and stronger skills for recognition of what might be domestic violence.
That takes us a way. Does it take us far enough? That is part of all of the questions that we are seeking answers to now. It will be into the new year before I would be satisfied that we have all of the views back from all of the people to whom we need to speak to fully understand the question, fully understand the risks and exposures at which we might place people at, and what we need to do in terms of resources to close that gap, to be comforted enough that we would not be putting people further at risk as a result of mandatory reporting.
It is a very open question. It is a principle that has support, but needs further understanding.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016