STRONGER COMMUNITIES LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (MISCELLANEOUS) BILL 2020

Second Reading Debate

Ms JODIE HARRISON(Charlestown) (14:49:50):I will take particular note of the legislative changes which relate to children and young people in the Stronger Communities Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2020. The bill amends the definition of prescribed sexual offences under section 3 of the Criminal Procedure Act to include offences relating to the recording and distribution of intimate images without consent. I welcome the move to expand the definition to capture these appalling and increasingly common offences. This will further enshrine in legislation recommendation 4 in the 2016 report of the Committee on Children and Young People titledSexualisationofchildrenandyoung people, which called on the AttorneyGeneral to introduce legislation to create specific offences of distributing or threatening to distribute an intimate image.

Amendments to the Crimes Act in 2017 made it a criminal offence to record and distribute intimate images of a person without consent, imposing potential financial penalties and custodial sentences on people found guilty of doing so. Those amendments also made it an offence to threaten to record or distribute intimate images. The expansion of the definition of "prescribed sexual offence" under part 5 of the Criminal Procedures Act is important. When giving evidence special arrangements will now be extended to victims of prescribed sexual offences. This extra layer of protection will help shield victims from the stresses of court. It will allow them to see their exploiters prosecuted without being retraumatised by the often confusing and onerous procedures required by the law of them in the prosecution of these offences.

The recommendation to criminalise the non-consensual or malicious sharing of intimate images was borne out of the committee's inquiry into a variety of topics related to the sexualisation of children and young people. This included what has become known as revenge pornography, which is the practice of sharing intimate or sexual images without the consent of the subject or subjects involved or for malicious purposes. The committee noted in the report:

the typical revenge pornography scenario is one where a person has an intimate or sexually explicit image or video of themselves posted online by their ex-partner without their consent.

There are even dedicated revenge porn websites that encourage people to upload intimate content featuring their former partners, without the consent of the other party. The objective of a revenge pornographer is clear, and that is the humiliation of their former partner. That humiliation is made possible by the heinous exploitation of that former partner's trust. It is unacceptable in any form. The harm caused by intentional or malicious sharing of intimate images without consent has been widely acknowledged, both during the inquiry and in the years since.

I applaud moves to help protect victims from being retraumatised when their matter is heard in court. Making revenge porn or threatening revenge pornography a prescribed sexual offence entitles victims to a number of extra layers of protection. These include: allowing for the proceedings to be held in a closed court while a victim of revenge pornography, or of any prescribed sexual offence, is giving evidence; providing the option to give evidence via CCTV, or other alternative arrangements; and allowing complainants to have a support person present while giving evidence. Often victims in the witness box are called upon to examine and to comment on intimate imagery of themselves, including during intensive cross-examination regarding the context of the intimate content. While these offences do not necessarily involve the occasion of a physical assault, they are still deeply traumatic for the victima victim who is, statistically, going to be a girl or a young woman. These offences involve a deep trespass against the victim and often cause lasting harm, and we should do what we can to ensure that the court experience does not deepen those wounds any further. The extent of harm that can be caused by revenge pornography was outlined by the Advocate for Children and Young People, at that time Andrew Johnson, who told the committee:

The non-consensual redistribution of sexts can cause significant harm to the victim, affecting the young person's wellbeing, health, school, employment, family and peer relationships. Young people may find themselves the victims of humiliation, bullying, harassment, threat, punishment (from school and/or parents) and criminalisation.

The changes to the legislation will offer victims of revenge pornography the same protections as victims of other sexual offences while participating in the criminal justice system. That is an appropriate step to support them through a very difficult time. I am also glad to see amendments to the Act which will further strengthen the court's ability to make restitution orders related to the distribution or threatened distribution of intimate images. The amendments will ensure that victims who have suffered fear and trauma as a result of threatened revenge porn are able to access the same remedy as those who have had intimate images distributed without their consent. The court will also be able to make orders which prevent future threats from being made with images in the offender's possession.

I remember going over the submissions to the inquiry on this topic as a member of the Committee on Children and Young People. It made for harrowing reading. The lasting impacts of revenge pornography are still not completely understood, but the position we in this Parliament must take is absolutely clear. The sharing of intimate images without consent is never acceptable. The distribution of those images in order to get back at an ex-partner is a disgusting act. Those who violate this law should be prosecuted and those who have been violated should be protected. I am pleased that the bill will strengthen legislation relating to these crimes and go some way towards better protection.

I also note the efforts in the bill to clarify the role of children's champions in all the relevant stages of investigation and prosecution. As I have outlined, the court process, especially from within the witness box, can be confusing and retraumatising for victims, and this can be compounded for children. Children's champions are there to assist young witnesses to give their best evidence, ensuring that questions put to child witnesses and the answers they provide are understood by all parties. They work to make sure that the child's developmental or communicative needs are met, and they have a duty to the court to impartially facilitate communication with the witness so that they can provide their best evidence. An amendment in the bill will remove legislative ambiguity about the role of a children's champion throughout the investigative and prosecution processes, and that is a step forward in supporting young witnesses.

The bill will amend the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act to provide an express power for entry and inspection of the residences of authorised carers, those applying to become authorised carers and prospective guardians. I note that those powers are subject to consent for prospective guardians and those applying to be an authorised carer, but it is a condition of authorisation that home inspections are undertaken for those with a child in their care. The aim of the amendment is to ensure that carers, applicants and prospective guardians are providing a safe and secure environment for a child. This is a continuation of efforts to transfer the provisions of the Child and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Regulation into legislation. The ongoing project is also reflected in the insertion of an express power into the Children's Guardian Act to manage information for the purposes of registers kept by the Children's Guardian. It is a necessary step in the establishment and operation of the new register of residential care workers. That express power will secure the flow of information necessary to protect the safety, welfare and wellbeing of children and young people in outofhome care. I join my colleagues in not opposing the bill.