Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 7 Hansard (25 June) . . Page.. 2034 ..

MS TUCKER (10.32): I present the Domestic Violence (Amendment) Bill (No. 3) 1997.

Title read by Clerk.

MS TUCKER: I move:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

Mr Speaker, the legislation I am tabling today includes a number of amendments to the Domestic Violence Act. To summarise, the purpose of the legislation is to improve and strengthen the process for receiving protection in domestic situations. This legislation increases the maximum duration of a protection order from 12 months to two years and also provides a clearer extension process. It removes the requirement for an applicant for a protection order to prove that they "fear for their safety". It removes the requirement for an applicant for a protection order to prove that the domestic violence is likely to occur again in the future. It includes a provision to require the court, in determining an application for a protection order, to have regard to, firstly, any history of domestic violence, including details and circumstances of any previous protection order; and, secondly, the need to ensure that property is protected from damage.

The legislation is based on recommendations made in the second report on domestic violence by the Community Law Reform Committee. This report reviewed the civil system for securing protection from violence or harassment, while the first report focused on reform of the criminal justice system and agencies dealing with domestic violence in that system. The approach of the Community Law Reform Committee was to take a very holistic approach to the issues of domestic violence, and they came up with proposals that they hoped would form a blueprint for change in the way in which the community deals with domestic violence. They were particularly concerned to ensure a multisystems approach. As members are aware, we already have on the table a number of issues raised by the first report, and again tomorrow we will be debating the legislation establishing the Domestic Violence Prevention Council.

The Government has not yet responded to the second report, which focuses on the civil system. While I look forward to seeing that response and possibly further reforms in this area in the future, I think some of the issues that are contained in the legislation I am tabling today are very important and deserve to be debated sooner rather than later. I will deal first with the extension of protection orders. The amendment I am putting forward proposes an increase in the maximum duration of a protection order from 12 months to two years, but with a provision for the court to grant a longer period if there are special reasons for doing so. This is outlined in clause 7 of the Bill. I am also proposing a much clearer extension process which will ensure that there are no gaps in protection. Currently, the extension process is inadequate because some magistrates take the view that a fresh application cannot be considered while the previous order is still in existence, which means that there will be a gap when no protection is available.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .