The Hon. JANELLE SAFFIN [3.18 p.m.]: I move the following motion, as amended by leave:

That this House:

1. Recognises the substantial work and commitment of the New South Wales community, especially women, in their efforts to help victims/survivors of domestic violence, and to reduce the alarmingly high levels of domestic violence in our community.

2. Recognises the tremendous effort that the New South Wales local domestic violence committees put into promotional community activities during the National Stop Domestic Violence Day Week activities.

3. Praises the significant role that the local domestic violence committees play in New South Wales.

4. Recognises the need to stay informed about domestic violence issues, to advocate for victims/survivors appropriate and adequate services, and to monitor the legal response for their situation.

5. Calls on government at all levels to ensure that domestic violence is treated as a priority in respect of public policy and funding.

My colleague the Hon. Elaine Nile has just spoken about violence against women and some of the tragedies and atrocities that are perpetrated against women. I cannot even bear to think about some of the things that she mentioned. They defy thought. In the past few weeks especially, but for a lot longer before that, atrocities have been occurring in East Timor. I was talking to a friend of mine who knows about war and has spent a lot of time in war zones - in Rwanda, Kosovo and such places.

I said I cannot bear to think about what is happening to the women, or of the rapes that would be taking place. Other atrocities are reported first, and only later do we hear about the terrible rapes and other things that occur. The threat and actuality of rape are always used as a weapon against women. My colleague the Hon. Elaine Nile said she wants governments to take responsibility. Governments can take leadership and some responsibility, but men must take responsibility for their actions, particularly when pornographic material is involved. The first paragraph of the motion reads:

That this House:

1. Recognises the substantial work and commitment of the New South Wales community, especially women, in their efforts to help victims/survivors of domestic violence, and to reduce the alarmingly high levels of domestic violence in our community.

It is extremely important to recognise the substantial amount of work that is done in the community. Much of it is undertaken by women by way of assisting and giving protection to women and children who are living in domestic violence situations or trying to escape or change the domestic violence in their lives.

Yesterday I visited Tamworth, where I chaired a session of the Government Spokeswomen’s Program. Volunteering was one of the items on the agenda. One of the women there, Judy Lord, spoke about volunteering. We heard facts and figures and had a lot of discussion about volunteering. Many members of the community, both women and men, contribute a lot to the community in terms of volunteering in all sorts of areas. But the statistics show overwhelmingly that women do the majority of volunteer work, and they do it in many ways. One is assisting with domestic violence problems.

My local community has a number of funded services that assist in domestic violence matters. But there are also local domestic violence committees and many other services that help women and children escape domestic violence. All of those services are unfunded and are staffed by volunteers. As we know, there is quite often a cost incurred by volunteers, particularly those who help women and children.

The first paragraph of the motion states that we should work "to reduce the alarmingly high level
Page 620
of domestic violence in our community". It is extremely difficult to obtain an accurate statistic on the incidence of domestic violence in the community, as the statistics vary. Some indicate that one in 10 women experience some form of violence at some time in their lives that can be characterised as domestic violence. Other statistics suggest that the incidence is one in four. Other studies indicate that the figure is even higher. Given my experience in that area, I suggest that the figure would be higher than one in 10.

Domestic violence is under-reported. It is a difficult issue to deal with, particularly for women. Women who become victims of domestic violence are initially quite shocked, and there is a disbelief that it is happening to them. It can be very difficult for them to deal with it. It is one of those things that a woman just does not talk about. She would not ring up someone after the first incident and say, "Guess what happened last night?" That taboo surrounds domestic violence. Admittedly, that taboo has changed, but it could change more.

Domestic violence also has shame attached to it; and women victims and children are often in a relationship of interdependency and dependency. I know that some people who do not have a lot of experience with domestic violence find it difficult to believe that a woman who has a husband or a partner who is violent towards her may still love him but just wants the violence to stop. There are many reasons why it is extremely difficult for women to talk about domestic violence and report it.

Many years ago when I worked in the domestic violence area I used to give talks to community organisations, particularly all-male community organisations. At the time it was Lions and Rotary. I also conducted training courses for police. One of the things I discovered was that men rarely talk about domestic violence. The statistics show, overwhelmingly, that the perpetrators of domestic violence against women are men, and it is one of those things that men do not talk about. During my talks I often said to men, "If you have a friend who is an abuser, or if there is someone in your community who is an abuser, I know it might be difficult but it is really important that you discuss the matter with that person."

Most men will not talk about domestic violence. Perpetrators, even if they want to get help and want to change, find it very difficult to talk about it. Equally, their mates find it difficult to raise the matter with them and say, "Yes, I know that this is going on in your relationship, I know that you are abusing," or something similar. Domestic violence is one of those crimes - and it is a crime - that stays undercover.

These are some of the difficulties of dealing with domestic violence. As I said, it is seen as a personal issue. It was a long time before we characterised it as a crime. Today when I was thinking about what I would say in this debate I recalled that for about 20 years I have been working at a community level with women and children to try to reduce the high incidence of domestic violence, to bring the issue out into the community, and to have it recognised as a crime. I know that there are other ways we have to deal with the issue.

Clearly, assault is a crime and we do not equivocate about it. The Crimes Act - under section 494, if my memory serves me correctly - has a specific offence of "Assault Female" that recognises that it is a crime to assault a female. The Crimes Act does not differentiate between gender; it simply deals with the act. It does not say, "It is not a crime if you perpetrate violence against your wife"; it did not provide an exemption to what is seen as a criminal act. But domestic violence has not been treated as a crime. That has had to do with prevailing community attitudes. The community attitude was that domestic violence was clearly a private matter. That community attitude reflected how we see women in society in relation to men.

Some people say, "Why does it happen? Why does a person perpetrate such violence against the person he loves? Equally, why does that person put up with it?" It is like trying to explain human relationships: it is very difficult. But we now know enough about domestic violence to realise that we can prevent it and we can reduce it. Over the last two decades, and over the last decade in particular, we have put in place a number of legislative changes, a number of policy changes and a number of program changes whereby we can start to address domestic violence. The process will take a long time, and, as we know, it will not happen overnight.

There are many aspects of domestic violence. Clearly, it is not just the physical aspect of domestic violence we are talking about - though that is the aspect we can readily see and deal with, and that is the criminal aspect we can deal with.

Within a relationship, other forms of intimidatory behaviour are often associated with physical or domestic violence perpetrated against women. Sometimes those other forms of behaviour are present without physical violence, but generally it is like a package. In a relationship where one partner has so much power over the other partner
Page 621
that they resort to physical violence, the other forms of intimidatory behaviour take in such things as financial clout, being totally financially dependent and verbal harassment, including putting the woman down all the time - saying that she is not a good mother and that she is not a good anything, until eventually she starts to believe those things about herself.

Sexual violence is usually part and parcel of relationships in which domestic violence is a feature. Sexual assault is usually a manifestation of domestic violence, and it can be quite extreme. Sadly, some young women who have experienced domestic violence always expected that at some point in their lives they would be subjected to some form of domestic or sexual violence. In a sense they grow up almost expecting that that may become part and parcel of their lives at some stage. That is quite sad and an indictment on society. We live in a civilised democratic society, and it is very chilling to know that there is this expectation by some women that they will be subjected at some point in time to some form of violence.

About 20 years ago I began working with women and children in the area of domestic violence. When I first started to work with women who were trying to escape from domestic violence, there was really nowhere for them to go. There were no services and nobody would listen to them. The standard response used to be, "Well, it is your business. You will have to deal with it". That was the response from all major institutions across society.

It was not just one institution. If the women went to a community service, if there was one, the response was, "It is difficult but you will have to try to sort it out." If they went to their local priest or minister or tried to have their problem dealt with by their church, again it was a similar response, "Well, it is a private matter; you will have to try to deal with it. It is not a community or public issue". Likewise, if the police were involved, it was the same response, "It is just not one of those matters we can get involved in. It is a personal, private issue, unless the perpetrator of the violence is disturbing the peace in the neighbourhood".

It did not matter that the women were being beaten up. It was irrelevant that they might be half dead, bruised and battered, but if the perpetrator of the violence disturbed the peace in the neighbourhood then it might be an issue of policing. That used to be the response. It was termed by writers and commentators as the non-response. For a long time society had what was called a non-response. It was, "This happens, this is sad, this is awful, but as a society we are not going to respond to it because it is a private matter. It is a relationship matter and it would be intruding into private relationships, into marriages, partnerships and intimate relationships". We had what we called a non-response. That changed about 20 years ago when we started to come out of that non-response into responding to domestic violence.

We responded firstly by saying that we wanted to have domestic violence recognised as a crime. The New South Wales Crimes Act was no different to that of any other State. Clearly, if an assault took place, an assault was an assault and under the Crimes Act somebody could be prosecuted and punished according to law, but if a husband assaulted his wife he was not prosecuted. In part the law was being ignored.

In my view, and it has not changed, the Crimes Act did not need amending. All we needed to do was to implement it in respect of domestic violence situations. However, one of the things that often happens in society, and it is not only in this area, is that, because of community attitudes, the law is not implemented. So what do we do? We amend the law, almost as an act of symbolism to say that we are going to treat this importantly and tell the community that this is an issue. That is how I regard what happened with domestic violence.

I recall attending meetings to discuss this issue in 1979 or 1980 when I first became involved in talking about domestic violence and incest and what could be done about these crimes being perpetrated against women and children. I used to say, "The law is fine. All we need to do is implement it". Governments sometimes amend the law to show that they are serious about certain issues; and to show leadership and demonstrate to the community that they are leading in those particular areas. That, in effect, can bring about some of the cultural changes that are required and were required to make domestic violence a crime.

I recall that at the time we had badges, all sorts of things, to try to promote the idea that domestic violence was a crime. That was taken on by governments. It has been a change that has been taken on by governments at all levels across all political persuasions and across party lines because it was one of those issues in respect of which we jockey and argue and say that some of us do it better than others, but it is an issue that we have all treated as a priority issue. We have tried to deal with it in a bipartisan and multipartisan way. It is one of those issues where we really should not get
Page 622
into argy-bargy and one-up-manship. It is one of those issues we should try to work together on.

At that time we said that we were going to amend the Crimes Act. The Crimes Act was amended very slightly. I think it was about 1982. The Hon. R. D. Dyer might remember this.

The Hon. R. D. Dyer: I think it was 1984.

The Hon. JANELLE SAFFIN: It was round about 1992 to 1994 that the Government amended the Crimes Act by introducing the Crimes (Domestic Violence) Amendment Act, inserting the words "domestic violence" into the law. That then became an issue of significance. People used to be able to obtain restraining orders and so-called keep-the-peace orders. Then apprehended domestic violence orders [ADVOs] were introduced. Their application was restricted to people in intimate relationships. That was a significant change because it altered the test normally applicable under the Crimes Act.

Honourable members know that when dealing with crimes the test is proof beyond reasonable doubt. However, to obtain an apprehended domestic violence order, the test was on the balance of probabilities. It had been extremely difficult for women who were victims of domestic violence, intimidatory behaviour or threats of violence, or who apprehended that violence might be perpetrated against them, to prove beyond reasonable doubt that what they were saying was the fact. I know that still upsets some of my legal colleagues, who suggest that the usual test under the Crimes Act, proof beyond reasonable doubt, should have been retained.

The Hon. J. H. Jobling: That is a lawyer for you.

The Hon. JANELLE SAFFIN: It is persuasive for lawyers as well. However, the reality is that women found it almost impossible to obtain protection, which is one of the purposes of the law. The law must be fair but it must also be responsive to women and children, and because it is women and children who experience domestic violence and violence in such large numbers, we have to make sure that the law will respond to protect them. Over a period of time, looking back through our legal history, a pattern emerges of women being treated as property. That was why it was so difficult to deal with domestic violence as a crime.

Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of years of history showed that pattern. It went back to the code of Hammurabi and other codes that endorse physical punishment of women and children. The Napoleonic codes also endorsed physical punishment of women and children. The Blackstone commentaries similarly endorse physical punishment against women and children. In fact that is the origin of the rule of thumb: one could chastise a woman or child with a rod as long as the rod did not exceed a thumb’s thickness. I recall that from my studies of the legal history of women. They are not good memories of the treatment of women.

Honourable members would recall an attitude that used to prevail in the community and in the law that one should not interfere in a person’s home life or in private relationships. Remember the saying that a man’s home is his castle? That comes from a legal case which was, if I remember correctly, Seymane’s case of 1604. Our legal history is littered with examples and demonstrations of the fact that women were regarded as property, with the law permitting violence to be perpetrated against them by their husbands. That attitude still persists to some extent in recent times, even though our laws have changed.

Initially, we had what was called a non-response. Then we progressed to responding as a community. Apart from the law, the Government put in place a whole lot of programs, such as women’s refuges and domestic violence programs. We now have domestic violence regional co-ordinators in New South Wales and domestic violence policies at all levels of government. One policy, which I in fact co-wrote, was the domestic violence policy for health.

Most women victims of domestic violence were presenting to the health system, their doctor or an emergency department, and the fact that domestic violence was involved had not been picked up. The reason was simple: no-one asked about the cause of their injuries or medical conditions. Women were going to their doctors and health services and making all sorts of health complaints, sometimes with bruises that might suggest they had been battered but saying that the bruises were sustained by some other means. No-one was asking whether the injuries resulted from domestic violence. The question simply was not asked.

Therefore the Government changed the response of the health system. We could not tell private medical practitioners what they must do, but we worked with private practitioners in the community to try to obtain a different response, to enable practitioners to determine whether domestic violence is involved. The Government wrote what was a simple policy that was implemented in all health services, particularly emergency services. It enabled an inquiry to be made of women who
Page 623
presented to the health system if it is suspected that domestic violence was the problem.

Previously the staff, even if they suspected domestic violence, would not ask the appropriate question. That initiative, introduced a number of years ago, is still in place. Initially it was introduced locally, on the North Coast, then was adopted at State, and ultimately national level, to become part of national health policy. That is just one way in which the community, through the public services, responded to this issue.

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [3.48 p.m.]: I support the motion. As my colleague the Hon. Janelle Saffin said, domestic violence is one of those issues that, fortunately, goes beyond politics. I would hope that a motion such as this would receive the support of the whole of the House. I hope that many honourable members, quite apart from the women members, will take the opportunity to speak in support of the motion. Domestic violence is a significant issue. It was defined in 1995, in a paper on the status of women in New South Wales, as being any personal violence offence that occurred in a domestic context.

Domestic violence often is more broadly defined to include verbal, emotional and psychological abuse, sexual abuse, financial and economic abuse - such as withholding money - and social abuse, for example, preventing contact with family or friends. Research and experience have shown that overwhelmingly the majority of victims of domestic violence are women abused by current or former male partners. In fact, at the outset, I would like to say something about statistics in relation to domestic violence.


Only about 10 per cent of women who experience domestic violence seek crisis help, and only about 5 per cent call police. In an evaluation of the New South Wales apprehended violence order scheme, the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research reported:

In Australia, a national survey has recently been conducted to "provide national estimates of the nature and extent of violence experienced by women". Face-to-face interviews were conducted on a three-month period in 1996 with 6,300 women aged 18 years or more. It was estimated that, of the 4.3 million Australian women who were married or in a de facto relationship, 2.4 per cent experienced an incident of physical violence . . . by their current partner during the previous twelve months; and 7.6 per cent experienced an incident of physical violence by their current partner at some time during the relationship, with 5.5 per cent having been pushed, grabbed or shoved by their partner. Of the 5,964,200 Australian women who had ever been married or in a de facto relationship, it was estimated that 22.5 per cent had experienced physical violence by a partner (either current or previous) at some time during the relationship.

That startling figure of 22.5 per cent should not be ignored. Domestic violence is far more widespread than we are often prepared to acknowledge. This is not just an issue for women, it is a community issue. The Australian Bureau of Statistics in 1994 suggested that three in five women who had been assaulted knew their attacker. Many women are in greater danger in their own homes than on the street or in other circumstances. Further, in 1997, 39,960 complaints of domestic violence were brought to the New South Wales Local Courts. That is a significant statistic.

The Coalition when in government took the issue of domestic violence very seriously. In 1991 we conducted a survey on domestic violence. It is worth noting that the annual cost to New South Wales from domestic violence was estimated at $1.5 billion, in terms of lost working days, health issues and children’s welfare and in legal, police and medical resources. When one considers that the State budget of New South Wales is approximately $25 billion, that $1.5 billion represents an enormous waste of resources. As a community, but more particularly as a government and a parliament, we must regularly look for solutions and find better ways to address the issue.

I am pleased that the Hon. Janelle Saffin moved an amendment to her motion to call on all governments to ensure that domestic violence is treated as a priority. The Federal Government takes the issue of domestic violence seriously, and is playing its part to find solutions. I will say more about that shortly. The motion also recognises the substantial work and commitment of the New South Wales community, especially at local level, and refers to local domestic violence committees.

I endorse the words of the Hon. Janelle Saffin that local domestic violence committees do a first-rate job in supporting women in local communities. As I said, only 5 per cent of women who have been victims of domestic violence are prepared to make a complaint to police. Therefore, it is important that people in their local community provide support.

As the shadow minister on the status of women in the last Parliament, I spoke to local domestic violence committees on numerous occasions. Those committees work with meagre resources - which is not necessarily the fault of governments per se - and do a tremendous job, often providing a 24-hour service for women. In 1989, 28 local domestic violence committees, which have had
Page 624
the support of governments for a long time, attended their first conference in New South Wales. By 1991, there were 56 committees, and the local domestic violence groups formed the Domestic Violence Council.

I do not want to be political, but I was surprised when the Government abolished the advisory council in 1995. The conferences, which were held until 1995, had provided a forum for women working at the grassroots level to come together from across New South Wales to share their ideas. I was disappointed with the Government’s decision and considered it to be a backward step. In the spirit of today’s debate, I will not dwell on that issue.

I believe that local solutions are important. Domestic violence impacts on various communities in different ways. Sadly, Aboriginal communities have a high level of domestic violence. The Federal Government has prepared strategies aimed at indigenous communities. For example, the Justice Department is working on an indigenous rural model called "Working with adolescents to prevent domestic violence", which is looking for solutions for individual communities across rural Australia. We should not underestimate the need for particular solutions.

As an overview of domestic violence, I want to put on the record an important statement of principles, which was released in 1991, following an inquiry into domestic violence by the then Coalition Government. The summary of that statement of principles, which is as valid today as it was in 1991, states:

•women and children have a right to live safely and free of fear within their own homes;

•domestic violence is a range of abusive behaviours, perpetrated by one partner upon the other to gain and maintain control;

•domestic violence damages the well-being and future life chances of women and children;

•domestic violence occurs across all cultural and socio-economic groups;

•domestic violence is a phenomenon based in and perpetuated by existing societal conditions and social relations which reflect gender inequality and promote male power;

•domestic violence is perpetrated by men in an overwhelming majority of cases (95% of reported cases);

•acts of domestic violence and its consequences are the sole responsibility of the perpetrator;

•domestic assault is a crime;

•the safety and ongoing protection of women and children who have experienced or are experiencing domestic violence are of paramount considerations in any response;

•essential to any response are early identification, appropriate intervention and long-term solutions to provide for the well-being and life chances of women and children who have experienced domestic violence;

•language and cultural needs of women of non-English speaking background and Aboriginal women must be considered in any response;

•education and programs to promote gender equality are required to redress community apathy towards and tolerance of domestic violence;

•any response to domestic violence requires a consistent planned approach across all sectors of the community and at all levels of Government;

•all services which respond to domestic violence will adopt policies, procedures, programs and training in accordance with the above principles.

As I said, those principles are as important and relevant today as they were in 1991. Some of the principles deserve to be highlighted. Perhaps the most important is that domestic violence damages the life chances of women and children. We should remember that when children become involved in juvenile justice issues, truant, or exhibit dysfunctional behaviour, there is every chance that they live in an environment where violence is a part of their everyday existence. They know nothing else but a violent response to almost any incident.

As a community we have to reach out to those children and women who are victims of domestic violence. We should also reach out to men who commit domestic violence and teach them that there are ways to deal with problems other than by violence. That is an important point. We have to stand together. I have said on many occasions in this House that it is time issues such as domestic violence were dealt with openly. For far too long we have viewed them as private matters that should be swept under the carpet and not discussed. That is the last thing that should happen.

It is most important to give women the confidence to come forward and speak up. They should not feel guilty about seeking help. Local domestic violence support committees are very important, as well as Domestic Violence Week and Stop Domestic Violence Day. Women know that they are not alone, that friends and volunteers will help them and stand up for them. We must regularly take stock of what is available in the community to support those women.

Page 625

One of the great advances in the 1990s has been the introduction of court support services. In recent years many Local Courts in New South Wales have introduced court support services. Women are available to assist women who have to attend a court. Separate entrances and waiting rooms are provided so that the women do not have to confront the person against whom they have laid a complaint. In this debate women have taken the lead. In the 1990s in New South Wales we have been fortunate that every Attorney General has acknowledged the importance of protecting people from domestic violence and has provided resources and encouragement. The provision of court support services is one of the solutions to an extraordinarily complex issue.

I said earlier that I would say something about the Federal Government in regard to domestic violence. Until the motion was amended I detected a note of criticism, but I accept that that is not the case now. In the Federal Government’s last budget alone an additional $25 million has been provided for partnerships against domestic violence. That makes a total of $50 million allocated by the Federal Government in this area, with a particular focus on prevention in the key areas of children at risk, indigenous family violence, work with perpetrators and community education.

Since the budget was handed down the Federal Government has also announced that it will establish a Federal domestic violence clearing house. As I understand it, Ministers across Australia agreed that a clearing house should be developed to disseminate information on domestic violence and analyse current issues so that service providers and policy makers are up to date on the latest information on domestic violence policies and practices. That important initiative will be a support network for all governments. Certainly the Office of the Status of Women found strong support for a national clearing house. That recent initiative is part of the Federal Government’s commitment to provide support strategies to deal with domestic violence.

The Minister for the Status of Women recently delivered an important speech about domestic violence. She said that domestic violence should be dealt with as a community problem, not as something that belongs only to families or that only women or children should deal with. It is important to change attitudes towards domestic violence. The Parliament should reiterate that domestic violence is not acceptable. In that way everybody will get the message. Contrary to popular belief, women in Australia are in greater danger of violence, including rape and murder, in their own homes than they are on the streets. The risk is greatest in their own homes and amongst friends and acquaintances.

Whenever I give a speech such as this I know that I will get hate mail from a few disgruntled men who say that I am being anti-male. Nothing could be further from the truth. Men often stand up and tell other men that domestic violence is absolutely unacceptable. It is impossible to ignore the statistics, which show that 95 per cent of domestic violence is committed by males on females. I was angered by the recent statement by a magistrate that women bring domestic violence upon themselves by nagging. That is an extraordinary statement.

I hope that the magistrate has been shamed into understanding that he does not reflect community opinion. He should state now that he was wrong, and that the solution to nagging is certainly not violence. A study conducted in 1991 concluded that the cost to New South Wales as a result of domestic violence was $1.5 billion. With the shift in dollar values, that figure is greater today. That is a waste of resources and of lives. We could more productively use that $1.5 billion to properly support and work with families. However, domestic violence results in lost work time, health problems, and children who end up in juvenile justice centres simply by virtue of the fact that they have grown up in a violent household. Families, and men in particular, have to understand the consequences of their actions.

In conclusion, I support the motion moved by my colleague the Hon. Janelle Saffin. This issue is above politics; politics should never be involved in domestic violence. Parliament should tell the community that it is time to accept that domestic violence is a law and order issue. If any other issue cost the community $1.5 billion and was swept under the carpet, the community would say it was not acceptable. This matter should be kept out in the open and responses should be monitored.

I look forward to the inquiry into apprehended violence orders [AVOs]. Women need to know that AVOs will not be watered down, that they will work for them and are available to them. In fact, for the last 20 years an apprehended violence order has been one of the few weapons available to women. I do not believe that the Government would want to water them down. It needs to be pointed out to those who misuse AVOs that it is inappropriate to do so. Women who experience domestic violence should not lose out because of frivolous and vexatious misuse of the orders.

Page 626

The Hon. ELAINE NILE [4.08 p.m.]: I support the motion. I congratulate the Hon. Janelle Saffin on the motion and on her compassion for women and all people. She has shown particular compassion for the women in East Timor for their agony and suffering as a result of rape and violence. Everyone is concerned about domestic violence - or are they? What are the causes of domestic violence? The Hon. Janelle Saffin said that some men treat women as their property and do as they please to them. I am blessed to have a good husband and man. Some women do nag. I nag my husband, but I am blessed because he has a mind and a heart, and he completely ignores me. I am sorry to say that I do nag. I have been a nagger for 40-odd years. However, it does not pay off. It does not get me anywhere; I just get frustrated.

Women have complained to me about their husbands. Husbands who are addicted to pornography is one reason I introduced the Sexual Offence Damages Bill earlier. I had a woman crying in my arms because her husband was addicted to pornography. He had watched a video and he wanted to portray, on her body and in front of their children, what he had seen on the video. He forced the family to view the video. It is horrific to see a woman shudder and cry, and to go through that. That is one form of domestic violence. It is heartbreaking. I presented my bill today partly because of the domestic violence perpetrated against women. Domestic violence covers such a wide field. The Treasurer should start to read newspapers. An article entitled "Fighting a Social Evil" in the Illawarra Mercury of 4 February 1999 stated:

Domestic violence has become one of the greatest scourges on modern Australian society.

The underlying reasons are many - unemployment, alcohol, financial pressures, drugs and family break-ups just some of them.

Police resources and court time have been pushed to the limit in trying to deal with the upsurge of violence in the home and new strategies to deal with the problem are urgently needed.

This week NSW Police Minister Mr Paul Whelan announced that Lake Illawarra police will be one of four NSW commands selected to participate in a trial program designed to reduce domestic violence.

Lake Illawarra has one of the highest rates of domestic violence in the state.

One of the initiatives contained in the trial program is Lake Illawarra police will take out Apprehended Violence Orders on behalf of children at risk of domestic violence.

What is even more pleasing is that most of the initiatives contained in the program announced by Mr Whelan were devised by Lake Illawarra police in conjunction with numerous victims support groups and women’s refuges. The Hon. Janelle Saffin said that there are problems with domestic violence in Aboriginal communities and that most of them relate to alcohol. I remember a Christian woman who used to visit my home a few years ago. She was a beautiful, gentle woman with an artistic nature. On one occasion when she visited me she had a broken jaw, on another she had a broken collar bone and on another she had a broken arm.

I asked the woman how she lived like that. She said, "You know, when he’s sober he is such a lovely man, and I love him." Their son, who was in his twenties, was in a home; he had had brain surgery. They had such a bad life between the two of them that they literally clung to each other. The trouble was that he was hardly ever sober, yet she was willing to put up with the violence. It is sad. An article in the Australian of 2 September 1999 stated:

Wednesday is "Ladies’ Day" at Blacktown court in Sydney’s western suburbs.

Up to 50 applications for apprehended violence orders are shuffled through the wood-panelled courtroom every Wednesday.

In summer, it’s more. Yesterday, the first day of Spring, the court was not so busy.

"Only 35," said a court officer when asked how many cases would come before the magistrate.

I suppose those women were from a lower socioeconomic background, but I have no doubt it also happens to women from other socioeconomic backgrounds. We know of businessmen who are gentlemen to the outside world yet they are the opposite inside the house; they bash their wives. An article entitled "Aberdare man bashed mum for refusing drug money" in the Newcastle Herald of 31 August 1999 stated:

An Aberdare man who has twice bashed his mother when she refused him money to buy heroin was granted bail, after he smashed a car windscreen in a fit of rage yesterday.

It used to be said that people who touched their mothers were animals, yet it is becoming commonplace these days for sons to bash their mothers, sisters and so on. We talk about addicts breaking into homes, but this addict bashed his own mother while possibly under the influence of drugs. An article in the Sun-Herald of 16 May 1999 referred to violence classes for children. The article stated:

Children will be encouraged to talk about and even act out domestic violence as part of a national program to stop violence transferring to the next generation.

Page 627

That is good but I would not like to see in a classroom children relating their own personal backgrounds to other children. It needs to be done more discreetly. The article further stated:

The Federal Government has made children, affected by domestic violence, a priority for phase two of its Partnerships Against Domestic Violence.

Funding for the program, run by the Office of the Status of Women, was doubled in last week’s Federal Budget to $50 million until June 2001.

The scheme aims to develop a national strategy to prevent domestic violence. The focus on children will be sharpened dramatically through a public education campaign as well as school programs.

Family and Community Services Minister Jocelyn Newman said children were "forgotten victims" of domestic violence.

"There is clear evidence children who witness domestic violence at home tend to perpetrate it in their own lives as parents," she said.

Senator Newman said the public education campaign would be hard-hitting.

"Some of the drink-driving ads are pretty terrible but I think damaging children is just as dreadful."

I have to close my eyes every time I see the advertisement showing two brothers travelling along a road and a car pulling out in front of them, followed by an image of flowers on the ground. That advertisement is shown often on the South Coast. When one is travelling through an area one immediately thinks of that advertisement. People need to slow down. The article further stated:

A report by a Queensland project for professionals working with young people who had lived with violence, funded by the Partnership program, said schools had an important role to play.

"Schools should offer some system of early warning and referral to either victims or perpetrators of relationship violence," the report said.

"Violence prevention programs for adolescents need to include the school but also need to be highly integrated with other community resources and developments," it suggested.

It said many more children witnessed violence than their parents believed.

That is true. An article in the Illawarra Mercury of 21 April 1999 stated:

A Corrimal woman charged with attempting to murder the mother she accused of "wrecking her life" was yesterday refused bail in Wollongong Local Court.

Most cases of domestic violence involve men, but some women can be violent. This woman used a knife on her mother. The television advertisement showing a man bashing his wife has been effective. The Government could do more in terms of television advertising. Any man who bashes his wife or a woman is not a man, and the Government needs to play on this. Somehow the Government must get through to men that it is not a manly action to bash someone - and I am not a feminist.

The Hon. I. M. Macdonald: Yes you are.

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: I am not. I hope that I am feminine but I am not a feminist. I am not one of the ya-yas. Usually a woman is weaker than a man. Every night when married couples go to bed to sleep the man should tell his wife that he loves her. I used to say in meetings that women could say, "If you don’t tell me you love me I will thump you." People laugh at that suggestion because they know it is meant in a friendly way. A fellow said to me one night -

The Hon. Dr B. P. V. Pezzutti: Poor Fred!

The Hon. ELAINE NILE: If he forgets I give him a little tap. It is not a very nice thing to say but many people make a joke of it. I again congratulate the Hon. Janelle Saffin for bringing this issue forward today. The community and the Government must spend money on getting the message out to men. We have to re-educate the men.

The Hon. A. G. CORBETT [4.21 p.m.]: I also support the motion. As the Hon. Patricia Forsythe said, domestic violence can take many forms - verbal, physical, psychological, financial, social and emotional. But underlying each manifestation of domestic violence is the inability or the unwillingness of the perpetrators to control their own impulses and acknowledge the right of others to be treated with the respect each person deserves, to express feelings, to be listened to and understood and to have control over their own lives.

The aspect of domestic violence that most concerns me, however, is the strong likelihood that where domestic violence occurs - especially where it is of a verbal or physical nature - children, while trying to intervene to stop the argument or to protect a parent, can be assaulted themselves. There is a strong correlation between domestic violence in the home and the physical abuse of the children in the home. Children react to domestic violence in different ways but children cannot escape being emotionally hurt as they see the people that they love hurt each other. It is simply that some children will express their hurt at the time while others will retain it within their body and show the pain in
Page 628
other areas of their life and at other times. For example, at school it is quite likely that the child will become a bully. Children might take it out on their pets or suffer physical symptoms such as headaches.

There is no excuse for violence against anyone in the home, including children. To close our eyes to this fact is to be hypocritical when we talk about domestic violence. It is a complex issue but one long-term solution is to ensure that as children mature they are given the necessary models, skills and attitudes that will ensure that they recognise and accept the dignity and equality of every individual and the skills, knowledge and aptitudes which will allow them to express their anger and frustrations in a manner that does not harm others or the property of others. Probably the most important thing we can do to prevent domestic violence is to ensure that children, as they grow up and mature, always feel loved and accepted without condition.

The Hon. I. COHEN [4.24 p.m.]: I will speak very briefly on behalf of the Greens on the motion moved by the Hon. Janelle Saffin. The Hon. Elaine Nile said that any man who perpetrates domestic violence is not a man. I agree with that. We need to get away from the image of men being able to snigger in the pub and joke about any violence or any crime perpetrated against women - or anyone for that matter, women or children. For far too long we have had a culture accepting of domestic violence.

A woman who works with me as a researcher has discussed with me her upbringing. She lived just up from the Unanderra Workers Club. As a small child she would see drunken men coming home at the end of the week after spending their pay on grog. When they got home they would be asked by their wives, "Where is the money to feed the children?" Jan Barham, who is now a Byron councillor and has been working on issues such as this, said that every week as a little child across the road behind the curtains she would regularly see a type of shadow play of the man lurching and beating up his wife.

This happened over and over again in suburbs where people were doing it tough. Until recently the terrible problem went unreported. The unacceptable had been accepted. I applaud any moves, particularly this move by the Hon. Janelle Saffin, to change the situation. Domestic violence is completely unacceptable. It is important that men stand up and speak on this issue and not be in any way intimidated. They should not think that they are somehow stepping out of the mould. It is vital for men to show the lead and to say that it is strong to be sensitive. It is appropriate to be caring and it is appropriate to be gentle when dealing with other people, particularly the woman in your life and any children involved in a domestic situation.

High unemployment causes a lot of pressure and frustration. Domestic violence is increasing again because of the terrible pressures. We have to work constructively to avoid a spiral into domestic violence. It is clear that domestic violence orders are soaring and the problems are increasing. But perhaps the number of orders shows that women are taking control of their situation. On 20 October 1998 the Sydney Morning Herald carried the following article by Luis M. Garcia:

Domestic violence protection orders have surged by more than 53 per cent in a year in parts of New South Wales and welfare workers largely blame economic stress, especially rural unemployment and a shortage of affordable housing in Sydney’s outer suburbs.

At the same time, welfare groups report a huge rise in the number of women and children seeking help from refuge and counselling services.

The number of domestic violence orders granted by the Local Court has increased dramatically. Society is under stress. Therefore we need to take a greater responsibility to educate against domestic violence and allow people, particularly women and children, to feel safe in their own homes. On 28 April an article in the Daily Telegraph stated:

Department of Community Services figures showed calls to its violence line had increased 24 per cent to almost 12,000 in the past three years.

An average of 40 women are killed each year in New South Wales as a result of domestic violence. This year’s anti-violence campaign targets women from Aboriginal, rural and non-English backgrounds, and gays and lesbians.

Vulnerable people need adequate protection. It is a positive move that the matter has been raised. The recent comments by a magistrate suggesting that it was reasonable that women should suffer domestic violence if they nag or whatever were reprehensible coming from a public figure in this day and age. As a Green and as a man I utterly reject such a statement. Domestic violence needs to be addressed in a forthright fashion. The authorities are moving constructively in this direction. All community spokespeople - particularly spokesmen, as the magistrate was - have a basic responsibility to acknowledge their role and take great care in any utterances on the matter.

The Hon. HELEN SHAM-HO [4.20 p.m.]: I too congratulate the Hon. Janelle Saffin on again
Page 629
raising these important issues. As recently as two weeks ago, on 30 August, an article in the Australian under the heading "Women ‘to blame for violence’" read:

Women push men into domestic violence by "nagging, bitching and emotionally hurting them", a magistrate is reported as saying in a report to be released today.

The comments are included in a NSW Judicial Commission survey of magistrates about apprehended violence orders, which asked 122 magistrates to respond to questions on the issue.

This motion is extremely timely. In view of the survey regarding apprehended violence orders [AVOs] and that comment by the magistrate, it is a good time to debate domestic violence. Given the headway made in this area in the past 10 years or so, it is easy to forget the years of struggle endured by many committed women in our community - and also men - to have assaults in the home brought into the public sphere. I deliberately use the word "assaults", for it is not such a long time ago that violence in the home was not regarded as assault at all - at least by the perpetrators - neither in the general meaning of the word nor in the criminal sense.

Domestic violence was even referred to by police as a "domestic squabble". Assault was something that happened in the public arena, but the physical assault of one’s partner or children in the home was considered to be a different thing altogether. In the dark old days domestic violence not only was not considered to be a crime, but was even often considered to be a right. It was not easy to break the code of silence and bring this crime into the public sphere and have it recognised for what it is: a crime. But in the past, women did not want to report it. It took years of often humiliating struggle to achieve this recognition.

With the availability now of apprehended violence orders, women’s refuges, domestic violence committees and women’s legal centres, among other support bodies, it may seem that we have come a long way and that domestic violence is no longer an issue. My very deep concern about all this is that the advances we have made are very fragile, and that is why I urge the House to support this motion, particularly the need for domestic violence to have priority and attention.

The recent comments by the notorious magistrate are instructive of the fragility of the community’s acceptance of the issue having been brought into the public arena, as opposed to being left as a family matter. Old attitudes die hard, and it is evident from those comments and the strength of the divisive debate that ensued in some quarters that there remains a worrying level of opposition to the advances made by women with regard to domestic violence.

My grave concern is that if we want to keep domestic violence as a matter of priority, but actively stop promoting it, it will not take many years for the gains we have made to be eroded. We must continue to fight to maintain the level of protection we have achieved for women and children and ensure it is effective.

Another current development that is of concern to me is the argument that apprehended violence orders are being abused and that their use should therefore be decreased. It is of concern to me that the debate on this issue, particularly as it has been presented in some media articles, clouds the facts by not making clear the distinction between domestic violence orders [DVOs] and personal violence orders [PVOs].

I believe that the Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations referred to that matter in this House yesterday. As honourable members may be aware, when DVOs were originally introduced in New South Wales in 1983 they were limited to married or de facto relationships. Five years later their scope was extended to include all people living in a common household - that is, blood relations, married couples and people living in intimate relationships. In 1990, PVOs were introduced, and they extended apprehended violence orders to include anyone who feared violence from any person.

While I do not want to diminish the usefulness and importance of the latter category, PVOs, as opposed to DVOs, the common consensus in recent studies, such as the recent survey of magistrates, is that under the current legislation PVOs have been more open to abuse and have been overly used in disputes between neighbours, for example, in circumstances that do not call for such an order.

The dramatic increase in AVOs in New South Wales last year has largely been attributed to the frivolous use of PVOs. I emphasis that in saying this I do not mean that PVOs are not a necessary and important means of providing protection to threatened people in our community. It is just that in this area we need to further examine how to prevent their frivolous use.

According to the same survey and other research, DVOs have been shown to work very well
Page 630
in reducing domestic violence and increasing the level of security for women living in violent domestic situations. Their usefulness as a means of protection for vulnerable women in our community must therefore be vigorously maintained. To some extent their effectiveness depends on the support that the perpetrator perceives this protective legislation is being given by us as members of Parliament, the wider community, the police and the judiciary. Our support is very important in helping to uphold this legislation in practice.

I commend the Attorney General for the work he has done on this issue. His strong public support has been invaluable. I commend also all other members of Parliament who have given their support. My purpose in referring to the negative comments by the magistrate and the current confusion surrounding the review of AVOs is to show that this motion continues to be very timely.

I again commend the Hon. Janelle Saffin for raising this issue. Through hard work and courage much has been achieved with regard to domestic violence. However, what took decades to achieve could be lost in a relatively short period if we do not continue to be vigilant about this issue. I strongly support the motion.

Ms LEE RHIANNON [4.38 p.m.]: I congratulate my colleague the Hon. Janelle Saffin on moving this motion. In congratulating her I draw the attention of the House to the members who have spoken on this important issue. I have done a quick calculation on the number of men and women who have spoken in this debate, and I think there is a reason for considerable concern. Day after day in this House I hear many male members go on and on about issues, some important, but often wasting considerable time.

To date I have not heard one male member of either of the major parties speak to this important motion. The Hon. A. G. Corbett and the Hon. I. Cohen have spoken and I understand that the Hon. Dr A. Chesterfield-Evans will follow me. If they are the only men to speak in this debate, men will constitute only 37 per cent of the speakers in this debate, whereas they constitute 80 per cent of the membership of this House. That is an unfortunate comment on this most important issue.

I note that paragraph 4 of the motion raises the need to stay informed on the important issue of domestic violence. The Hon. Janelle Saffin particularly notes the need to monitor the legal response to those who have suffered domestic violence. Within this context I highlight a recommendation from the New South Wales Council of Social Services Women’s Domestic Violence Court Assistance Program:

The women’s domestic violence court assistance schemes provide legal and non-legal support for women victims of domestic violence seeking apprehended violence orders and other assistance from the court system in relation to domestic violence.

This applies to New South Wales. The recommendation continued:

At present, 26 co-ordinators are funded to oversee 32 courts around the State. Additional funding is expected to provide an additional eight co-ordinators in 1999. In addition to the funding of these co-ordinators, the original submission to the Attorney-General’s Department included a recommendation for funding sessional rates for solicitors and support workers on the particular list that day.

At present, the Redfern model has been the model of best practice. It advocates the use of support workers who are already in paid employment, however this has been difficult for a number of schemes because of a lack of community workers who are able to donate their time to participation on the domestic violence roster.

The Network of Women’s Domestic Violence Court Assistance Schemes recommends that solicitors and support workers be employed for one half day per week in each scheme and that an additional resource worker be placed with the Domestic Violence Advocacy Service to adequately provide a secretariat for the Women’s Domestic Violence Court Assistance Schemes.

The Greens strongly support the NCOSS recommendation that an additional $300,000 be committed to the scheme. It specifically suggests that a solicitor be employed for half a day per week and a support worker be employed for a full day per week at each of the women’s domestic violence court assistance schemes, and an additional resource worker should be placed with the Domestic Violence Advocacy Service. The total estimated cost of that would be $1.2 million.

I understand that at present the money is not there, but hopefully down the track the motion of the Hon. Janelle Saffin will be given legs and it will be able to assist the many victims of domestic violence - women, some men and many children in this State - who suffer daily. I hope that more of the men in this Chamber will contribute to the debate and not just sleep through it.

The Hon. Dr A. CHESTERFIELD-EVANS [4.42 p.m.]: The practice of cock fighting is banned in Australia, but is not banned in the Philippines. An interesting feature is that if two cocks are fighting and they determine which is the stronger, the weaker cock will leave. If, however, they are put in a very
Page 631
small cage so that they cannot get away, they will continue to fight until one is killed.

If, say, the New South Wales public Service was downsized and many people were under threat of losing their jobs, they would fight among themselves and not co-operate because they would basically try to ensure that they were high enough up the ladder not to be sacked. Domestic violence should be considered in the same way as preventive health.

What are the factors that make for domestic violence? When I was in America for the centenary of the Statue of Liberty, which was advertised on the radio every 10 minutes, it struck me that some people in America had everything in the world and some people did not even know what their rights were. The American radio network could not bear to say that some people have no rights at all and that they receive a very bad deal. The most they could say in their ads about the social inequity in the United States as they hyped up the firework celebrations for the centenary of the Statue of Liberty was that some people did not know what their rights were.

Some people, of course, want a good legal system where advocacy groups fight for their rights. As any one who has dealt with the law knows, it is a cumbersome system, something of a lottery, and so expensive that many people cannot access it. It is necessary in society to have policies that are conducive to domestic harmony, and that means not putting individuals at the bottom of society under immense economic or other pressures. There is no point going to legalistic and other models to try to treat individual cases if one does not have policies that look at society in a holistic manner and deal with the overall economic and employment situations of people at the bottom of the ladder.

Obviously I support this motion, as I would support hospitals, but I do not think that hospitals are the answer to health. And, of course, I believe in prevention. It makes more sense to try to obviate people having to go to hospital rather than merely putting a lot of money into hospitals once they get there. Just as there is plenty of money for coronary bypasses but no money for tobacco prevention, so there is plenty of money for gaols but no money for domestic support, for relationships that are in trouble, for kids who are in trouble in the juvenile justice system, or for equality of opportunity for people who want to go to TAFE colleges to try to get themselves from a position where their jobs are at risk to a position where they are better skilled and their future employment is more secure.

As we act to strengthen the domestic violence network we have to think of the network itself at the point of impact, so to speak. If there is a rise in domestic violence, we should question whether it is because better statistics are collected, because there is more public awareness, or simply because people at the bottom end of the spectrum are being squeezed by the increasing gap between the rich and the poor and the concentration of income is at the top of society, or because there are policies in place that simply look after those with the economic power, as happens in the United States of America and is increasingly happening here.

There is no doubt that domestic violence is a very large problem. Australian statistics on domestic violence from the Domestic Violence and Incest Resource Centre can be found on the Internet at http://home.vicnet.net.au/dvirc/DV.htm.

The women’s safety survey conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that approximately 6,300 women were asked about their experience of actual or threatened physical violence and, based on a survey result, the ABS estimated that in the 12 months prior to the survey 7.1 per cent of the Australian female population or 490,400 women experienced violence; 6.2 per cent of women experienced violence perpetrated by a male; 1.6 per cent experienced violence perpetrated by a female; 2.6 per cent of women who were married or in a defacto relationship - 111,000 women - had experienced violence perpetrated by their current partner; and 4.8 per cent of unmarried women had experienced violence by their previous partner in the past 12 months.

The response of those women were such that of those who had been assaulted in the 12-month period, 58 per cent spoke to a friend, 53 spoke to a family member, 12 per cent spoke to a counsellor and 4.5 per cent spoke to a crisis service organisation. Only 19 per cent reported the incident to police. Women who experienced violence by a partner were least likely to have reported the assault, while women assaulted by a stranger were more likely to report to the police and 18 per cent had never told anyone about the incident. So if we rely purely on crisis services, we are seeing only the 4.5 per cent, which is, of course, only the tip of the iceberg. The survey went on to look at a large number of other aspects of the problem.

This presupposes that sometimes subtle violence results in homicide. A study of Australia-wide homicide data for 1989 to 1991 found that of 150 killings between adults in relationships, 121 victims were female. So women clearly suffer worst
Page 632
from the disharmony between partners in male-female relationships. This matter needs to be addressed. The Australian Democrats support the motion and congratulates those who are doing something about this problem.

We too call on the Government to act in this respect. The Australian Democrats would also like to consider the issue in its broader context and seek to make governments recognise that their policies on a broad range of social issues should ameliorate the conditions that make violence between individuals more likely. This must be kept in mind by all honourable members of this Parliament and by all who are preparing or framing legislation.

The Hon. JAN BURNSWOODS [4.53 p.m.]: I will speak only briefly to this excellent motion moved by the Hon. Janelle Saffin. It recognises the work in particular of local domestic violence committees, but many other people as well, in combatting the terrible levels of domestic violence in our community. The honourable member is to be congratulated. Domestic violence used to be very much a silent or buried issue. More recently, people have started talking about the issue. It has been great to see several male members joining in the debate. Only more debate about the issue will ensure that domestic violence is not hidden but is addressed, ensuring that domestic violence is regarded as a crime where appropriate.

The motion recognises the substantial work and commitment of the New South Wales community, especially women, in their efforts to help victims and survivors of domestic violence, and to reduce the alarmingly high levels of this violence in our community. It recognises the tremendous effort that local domestic violence committees have put into promotional community activities, and it praises the role that those committees have played in this State.

The motion recognises also the need to stay informed about domestic violence issues, to advocate for victims and survivors to have appropriate and adequate services, and to monitor the legal response to the situation. Finally, and sensibly, the motion was amended to call on all governments to ensure that domestic violence is treated as a priority in respect of public policy and funding, and to rate domestic violence as a matter of national crisis.

I have looked back over some of the material that I have accumulated on this issue since I became a member of this House. In some ways, it is frightening to look through the reports that have been produced over many years and to read the statistics and stories raised by others who have spoken in this debate. However, it is good that there has been a commitment to this issue by all governments. Only yesterday, for instance, the Attorney General, when asked a question in this House about the review of apprehended violence orders, referred to attempts to deal with the scourge of domestic violence and how the Government, through the Attorney General and his officers, have been reviewing the law governing apprehended violence orders.

Some complaints made about apprehended violence orders have been rather worrying, because they have tended to be mixed up with problem areas that are usually neighbourhood disputes. I think the system of apprehended violence orders is working well in respect of domestic violence. But, certainly, there have been problems in the other area mentioned. It is important that we recognise the range of tactics that has been adopted over the years to ensure that the community, including the police force, which is of great importance in the area of apprehended violence orders, regard and treat domestic violence and violence against women as a crime.

Much has already been said about the work of local committees and in particular the women involved in those committees. I too pay tribute to those committees. I add a particular tribute to the Domestic Violence Advocacy Service and the role that it has played over many years. I commend the role of all of the women, solicitors and others, who accompany victims to court and who, in a variety of ways, provide the legal, financial, psychological and other forms of support that victims of domestic violence need.

I was pleased with the level of agreement among members of this House on this issue. I thank the Hon. Janelle Saffin for placing this matter on the business paper and moving her motion in the House. It is through efforts of people like us in continuing to regard this issue as serious that we ensure that the community continues to regard domestic violence as serious. Ultimately, and most importantly, we need to change the behaviour of those men who still believe that domestic violence against women is a solution to their problems.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [4.55 p.m.]: As a mere male, I put on the record my support for the motion moved by the Hon. Janelle Saffin.

The Hon. JANELLE SAFFIN [4.56 p.m.], in reply: I thank my colleagues the Hon. Patricia Forsythe, the Hon. Elaine Nile, the Hon. A. G.
Page 633
Corbett, the Hon. I. Cohen, the Hon. Helen Sham-Ho, Ms Lee Rhiannon, the Hon. Dr A. Chesterfield-Evans, the Hon. Jan Burnswoods and Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile for participating in this debate. This debate has been important. When I came to this place I gave a commitment to the local community and the local domestic violence committee that I would keep myself informed on the issue of domestic violence and that I would speak out about it at every opportunity to make sure that the matter stayed on the agenda of this Parliament.

I know that I am not the only member who has given such commitments and pursued this issue. Other honourable members of this House, over a period of years, have done so. I thank them for that. However, this is an issue that we must continue to raise and include on the agenda because it will not go away overnight; it will take time to deal with the problem. Debating domestic violence in this Parliament accords the issue the importance that it deserves and labels it as a community issue. The local domestic violence committees do wonderful work. I take some pride in that.

Where I live, in Lismore, I was founding president of the Far North Coast Local Domestic Violence Liaison Committee. I remain a member of that committee, although I cannot get to the area often. However, I maintain my involvement with the committee and continue to work at the local level. In the early days of the committees I participated in their conferences. I pay tribute to those local committees, which operate all over the State. Whichever government is in office extends its support to the local committees. It is a comparatively small amount of money, but they do great work on a shoestring.

The local domestic violence committees continue to raise the issue at local level. They work across all sectors of the community - the public and private sectors, the church groups, women’s groups and other organisations - making sure that everyone in the local community knows that assistance is available for women who are escaping from domestic violence. I support the review of apprehended violence orders. My experiences working within the court system with women and with those orders suggest a need for some review. Some court cases involved relatively simple disputes that should not have been before the courts but which were the subject of applications for apprehended violence orders. We must find a way of dealing with that problem. I have talked at length with the Attorney General about apprehended violence orders. I commend the motion to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted. The House continued to sit.