Page 3708 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 26 August 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It seems to me to be a very big step that needed to be taken to open up that so-called private sanctum, the home, where everything is expected to be lovely and nice, and if it is not we do not talk about it. That certainly was the case in the rural area where I lived at that time. I have also—related to that same perpetrator—seen pets used as a threat: “If you don’t do such and such, I will harm your animal.” People who wish to wield power in the domestic scene will use whatever they see as vulnerable about the person that they wish to wield power over.
I think it is very hard to draw the line, as Mr Mulcahy was suggesting we do, between different kinds of domestic violence. Is it domestic violence if you just live with the threat of having a trigger pulled or a fist thrust into your face? I think that it is domestic violence even when the action does not happen, and I think that it happens not just between man and wife but between man and mother-in-law, man and whoever. We know that it occurs in our gay and our lesbian communities as well. I welcome the fact that, if we are going to have equality—which we have not quite got yet—in terms of civil unions, we must also have it in terms of the more negative sides of domestic arrangements.
I acknowledge as well what Mr Mulcahy said in relation to elder abuse. That is a growing problem. It has all the hallmarks of domestic violence in that the elder is usually quite powerless and often, unfortunately, especially in the situation where we have housing affordability problems, has little choice but to stay in that situation.
It is important that we strengthen the laws. It is also always going to be important that we try and remove the causes of domestic violence. That is usually around issues of power. There are still people who feel that they have the right, due to their position in the household, to inflict or threaten violence on another person, whether it be emotional or physical. That is the long-reaching project that we have ahead of us. We cannot ever solve that with laws. Unfortunately, what happens in the home is still invisible to many people and there is a shame in reporting it.
With this legislation we have to acknowledge the work of the Rape Crisis Centre and all the people who work in this area—who work with women and children and who also work with the men who are the perpetrators and with women when they are the perpetrators. We in this town are very lucky in the quality of people we have working in those services—in the refuges, in the domestic violence area. It is very unfortunate that their work does not diminish; if anything, it increases. By passing this legislation, I expect that, ironically, we may be increasing their workload, and broadening it as well.
Nonetheless, there are a lot of really good things in this legislation—the fact that a household is not a defining factor any more; that it is recognised that relationships cross domestic boundaries; that there are initiatives which work towards the protection of children and young people; that we are recognising that these issues also concern people in same-sex relationships; and that we are recognising the human rights of the victims.
The scrutiny committee did point out issues about the explanatory statement. As members, we rely on explanatory statements a great deal. The Attorney-General will
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .