STRONGER COMMUNITIES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (DOMESTIC VIOLENCE) BILL 2020

Ms JODIE HARRISON(Charlestown) (16:12:50):The passage of the Stronger Communities Legislation Amendment (Domestic Violence) Bill 2020 will constitute another step on the path towards protecting women from domestic violence. The bill will extend the meaning of "intimidation" as defined in the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act to include "harm to an animal" in particular circumstances. It will strengthen the apprehended domestic violence order regime and offer victim-survivors another layer of protection and additional pathways to access that protection. The bill will entitle domestic violence complainants to give evidence using alternative arrangements or by alternative means, including audiovisual link, in certain domestic violence proceedings. Those are all worthy and much-needed reforms. We still have such a long way to go. When we have two in five young men who say that they do not believe punching an intimate partner is domestic violence, we still have such a long way to go.

As it stands, the apprehended domestic violence order regime presents a number of challenges for victimsurvivors of domestic violence. When an offender is issued a provisional apprehended domestic violence order or is charged with a domestic violence-related offence by police or in cases where a victim-survivor applies for an ADVO, women are required to attend a local court. Frontline Women's Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Services [WDVCAS] workers and victim-survivors continue to report that they find the court system to be confusing and even hostile. Indeed, confronting their abuser in court, giving evidence against them and being crossexamined can often re-traumatise or further traumatise a victim-survivor.

For victim-survivors, so much can hinge on the outcome of this court matterwhether an ADVO will be in place for the victim-survivor's protection or whether an offender is found guilty of criminal offence. The bill follows recent changes to legislation which outlawed the threat to release intimate images for public consumption for the purposes of intimidation or retribution, indicating that the Government is well aware of the role that intimidating behaviour plays in domestic violence. I am glad that, after so many years and as a result of the work of so many campaigners and advocates, domestic violence is finally being taken seriously and the laws of this State are finally being changed to recognise the various forms that domestic violence can take. As Women's Safety NSW has said, the reforms proposed in the bill:

fail fully to address many of the ongoing issues faced by victim-survivors of domestic and family violence in NSW local courts

The processes in place to deal with ADVO matters vary greatly between different local courts, as does the quality of the facilities and the level of support that victim-survivors can access. As Women's Safety NSW illustrated:

The attitude and approach of local court magistrates to domestic and family violence matters is inconsistent, and instances of poor practice from magistrates undermine the safety and effectiveness of the court process.

I join with Women's Safety NSW in welcoming the aspects of this bill that address these concerns, particularly those that allow victim-survivors to give evidence by alternative means and for evidence to be given in closed courts during some phases of domestic violence proceedings. However, I also join with them in pointing out that these reforms do not go far enough. Women's Safety NSW has outlined further reforms in this area of the law, including the implementation of condensed ADVO lists and ADVO domestic violence charge lists in all courts across New South Wales. It has called for the introduction of designated hearing days for courts to hear domestic violence matters specifically and an increase in funding for Women's Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Services. I have received numerous representations in relation to this from residents my local area. Women's SafetyNSW has also called for the provision of safe room facilities to all victim-survivors when they attend court for domestic violence matters and has recommended that safe room facilities are of an equal standard in local courts across the State.

Domestic violence is not always physical. The abuse takes many forms: emotional, psychological, financial and more. We know that these non-physical forms of violence often escalate and that in 99 per cent of cases where a woman is murdered by a perpetrator of domestic violence, the murder is preceded by intimidating behaviours. Perpetrators of domestic violence will often stop at nothing to control their victims, even years or decades after an abusive relationship has ended. The forms that this intimidation can take vary but it is always disgusting. Perpetrators take control of their partner's finances and track their phones; they exert pressure through children and sometimes through pets. Any form of domestic violence is completely unacceptable. It takes an especially kind of craven monster to try to inflict violence on a victim-survivor through their pet.

For pet owners, few things are more precious than their animals. These animals rely on their owners and oftentimes, especially in the aftermath of trauma, owners rely on their pets for comfort and support. The perpetrators of domestic violence know this and that is why they may target victim-survivors' pets. So it is important to make clear that the prohibition imposed by an ADVO relating to destroying or damaging a protected person's property extends to the harming of an animal. I am glad that the bill addresses these abusive behaviours often utilised by domestic violence perpetrators. However, inflicting harm on animals is only one aspect of abusive behaviour. This bill is one step on the path to addressing the horrific problem of intimidation in domestic violence situations but it is only an incremental change. It is not enough.

We need more action; we need comprehensive action. We need to set out, in clear terms for all to hear, that intimidation is never okay, especially in the context of a domestic relationship. Rarely does one non-physical action rise to the level of outright abuse. Instead, perpetrators practise a pattern of behaviour that breaks down their target's defences, separates them from their support networks and leaves them isolated and fearful. Elected members of Parliament have a duty to make laws that strengthen our communities and protect those most vulnerable from harm. We have a duty to make laws that enable victims of crime to seek support and remedy. This bill goes some of the way to strengthening the existing regime of apprehended domestic violence orders, making courts safer for victim-survivors and outlawing intimidation tactics utilised by abusers.

I, like many other members, have met with dozens of victim-survivors. I have heard of the emotional terror that they have experienced, the physical trauma that they have endured and the lack of support that they have often received from a system that is supposed to support and protect them. Listening to their testimonies is harrowing. Ihave felt chills go through my body and wept tears with victim-survivors. I simply cannot fathom what it would be like to be in their shoes. Two in five young men do not think that punching an intimate partner is domestic violence. We have so much further to go. I join with my colleagues in opposing this bill. I urge the Government to do more to make these sorely needed reforms that are being called for by victimsurvivors and their advocacy groups a reality. I hope that one day we will never have to hear the terrible stories of what victim-survivors have experienced.