Chhour KarenKAREN CHHOUR (ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to stand on behalf of ACT and support this bill. Whilst I appreciate the intentions of this bill and see how important these changes really are it's kind of a disappointment that we're on the second to last day of Parliament and have waited this long to even get this far. The victims of sexual violence face many barriers even before they end up in the courts and I feel that this bill goes a long way to relieving some of the anxieties around sitting on a stand and telling your story to the world about what's happened to you without being cross-examined and being ripped apart on the stand. For a 12-year-old that could be absolutely devastating and not just for a couple of days but for years to come.The barrier I talk about when it comes to before even appearing before the court is that these questions can be asked even before they've ended up on the stand within court. When they go to lay this complaint when they go to seek for help and when there is an investigation into the process before ending up in court these questions can already be asked of them from the investigators which is absolutely devastating as well. So to have to face that on multiple occasions I feel that's actually quite disgusting that we've allowed this to go on for so long.There's also the inconsistencies between the two charges and I'm glad that this has been cleared up—the unintended consequences of the imprisonment term and the penalty of 20 years' imprisonment. When you look at the two different charges you find that the prosecutors are actually using a different charge because it's easier to prosecute. Rather than using the charge for sexual conduct with a child under 12 they're charging under sexual violation. So it's nice to see that we're aligning the maximum penalty for imprisonment so that we don't have that anomaly and so that children don't have to face absolutely devastating consequences for their mental health and for years to come just asking those questions of themselves. Because if the adults in your life are asking you those questions you could start questioning yourself and your actions and your behaviours when it's absolutely not your fault. Children are not to blame when adults take advantage of a young person. And if we can protect them in any way from those kinds of accusations I think this is really important and I absolutely thank the Government for bringing this to the table. These are things where politics needs to be taken aside and we need to make sure that we're doing what's in the best interests of our young people. And when I see a bill like this it actually gives me some hope that there will be a better outcome for our young people going through the courts.The only thing that I would have to say on this though is the age for consent for all sexual activity is regarded as 16 and therefore I kind of feel that the age of consent for all sexual activity should reflect this. I know that the charge for sexual conduct with a young person under 16 is in a separate section but I mean if you're not able to give consent then it should be reflected within law and you shouldn't be able to be cross-examined and asked when you're a 13- 14- or 15-year-old whether you enjoyed someone taking advantage of you either. So I hope that within the select committee process maybe we can have a bit of a conversation around including under-16-year-olds so that this anomaly between section 128B and section 132 don't have the same unintended consequences for under-16-year-olds.The other issue is that we need our young people to feel safe even before they go into court. I talked about the barriers—you know just even having the courage to sit in court and face your perpetrator and know that sometimes you might be speaking out against somebody that your family knows. It could be a family member it could be a family friend and you may not have the support of the people around you. So I feel we need to really really start looking into more ways that we can protect our young people when it comes to the court system and the way the courts deal with young people under the age of 16. I'm hoping that we have fixed this regulatory failure and the unintended consequences between section 128B and section 132 in order to allow prosecutors to do their job a lot more easily when it comes to dealing with sexual violence victims.The other issue that I actually applaud is dealing with the Family Court and actually putting our foot down and saying it's not OK to abuse the court system especially when it comes to the Family Court. Anybody who knows somebody who has dealt with the Family Court knows that the process can sometimes take years. You can be in a battle for years. Separation is a terrible thing and it's very emotional and sometimes it can be taken way too far within our court system. We can have vexatious allegations made and we can have people coming to the courts with issues that they really shouldn't be coming with and judges are being restricted in being able to stop that. So I really applaud the fact that we're going to allow the judges to start making decisions around that so that our young people aren't being in a tug of war between two parents for years and years. The only people that win are the lawyers in those circumstances and there are the costs to us as a society with young people being in that environment for so long. Anything that we can do to help within the Family Court system to stop the abuse of the processes within that system is a good thing in my mind.Then we also have the issue of when victims don't want name suppression for their perpetrator. They should be allowed to speak out. We spend a lot of time in this House talking about allowing victims to have a voice and not suppressing a victim's voice because it's important because part of the healing process is to be able to talk about what you've been through and actually stand up and not be frightened any more. In the way the court system is set up at the moment—whilst well intended—with having name suppression for the perpetrator to protect the victim often the victim would like to speak out about the person who has harmed them. But because of this name suppression they're not allowed to speak out about what has happened to them and they're being revictimised all over again. They're also seeking lawyers and paying thousands of dollars to try and figure out how to lift that name suppression. Legal aid is not available for that and I just find that quite unbelievable. The victim has had that kind of responsibility laid on to them when it shouldn't be their responsibility to fight the courts once again to have a voice. So I think making their voice more important and having judges being able to take their voices into consideration around name suppression is a fantastic thing because way too many times we have perpetrators hiding behind name suppression and victims are sitting there feeling like they have been silenced once again. I always stand in Parliament and say victims need to have a voice and they need to be able to stand up for themselves and say This is not OK. This person hurt me or harmed me and we need to do steps one two and three so that this doesn't happen to anybody else." But if they are under a name suppression order they're unable to do that. They are unable to speak out about their situation.So this out of all the bills actually—this I feel is the most empowering piece of legislation that I have spoken to since being an MP in Parliament. I'm proud to support it and I hope it helps victims to know that your voice matters and we will be listening once you're allowed to speak. So ACT supports this bill."