Page 3054 - Week 08 - Thursday, 15 August 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
address family violence. I believe Mr Hanson talked about it in the JACS section, and I will talk about it a bit again.
The family safety levy is targeted at innovative and new ways of tackling this wicked problem. That is all well and good. We clearly need innovation. But what happens to the pilots after they are found to be effective? They will no longer be innovative but, being effective, they will need to be funded. For example, the funding provided to Legal Aid under the family safety levy will cease coming from this levy. The community needs reassurance that such programs will not just come and go but will be maintained. I think it is incumbent on all ministers to ensure that ongoing funding is secured for all the successful initiatives that come out of the family safety levy.
There seems to be a bit of lack of consistency already in this, with the room for change program for perpetrators receiving additional funds over each of the next four years whilst an evaluation is undertaken. This may well be the correct thing to do. Hopefully it is doing a good job with the perpetrators. But also I note that it is, by comparison with services for victims, an expensive program to run. That makes it all the more important to ensure that it is working well and achieving the desired outcomes.
It is clear that the ACT community is broadly supportive of paying the family safety levy and on that basis we have an obligation to ensure that it is well and appropriately used. We must not lose the momentum that has been gained in addressing family violence since a number of tragic family violence deaths in our community a few years ago.
I must point out the inequity in effort, funding and programs when comparing family violence to sexual violence. While some family violence occurs in a domestic and family context, not all of it does. This is why it requires its own specific plan to address it. As I have said before, and I say again—unfortunately he is not here to listen to it—I look forward to working with the attorney on the development of a refined definition of consent in the Crimes Act during this term. I hope that this will be the catalyst for further change as far as sexual violence in our community goes. We need to have a definition which involves free and voluntary consent.
Unfortunately we are still waiting on the promised education campaigns about the non-consensual sharing of intimate images. I suggested a more focused approach is needed for the delivery of respectful relationships education, particularly that understanding and negotiating consent should be a focus for education spending in the next budget.
Despite the focus on hoarding this week, with a bill tabled by Mr Coe yesterday and with the government’s planned mandatory code of conduct for the management of hoarding, which is part of the litter bill that Mr Steel has put forward, I note there has been no allocation of funding for any programs that address hoarding behaviour. Members may be aware that previously Woden Community Service received a small amount of funding for this. But that funding has ceased.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video