Footnotes

CHAPTER 1 - Introduction

[1]        Journals of the Senate, No. 27-25 March 2011, p. 789.

[2]        Journals of the Senate, No. 31-14 June 2011, p. 941; Journals of the Senate, No. 42-16 August 2011, p. 1245; Journals of the Senate, No. 44-18August 2011, p. 1285.

[3]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 1.

[4]        Australian Institute of Family Studies, Evaluation of the 2006 family law reforms, December 2009.

[5]        The Hon. Professor Richard Chisholm AM, Family Courts Violence Review, 27 November 2009.

[6]        Family Law Council, Improving responses to family violence in the family law system: An advice on the intersection of family violence and family law issues, December 2009.

[7]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 1. For a comprehensive explanation of the evidence on which the Bill is based: see Attorney-General's Department, answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, pp 2-5.

[8]        The Attorney-General's Department subsequently indicated that some of the ALRC and NSWLRC's findings were considered in the formulation of the Bill: see Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 58.

[9]        The Hon. Robert McClelland MP, Attorney-General, House Hansard, 24 March 2011, p. 3141.

[10]      The Hon. Robert McClelland MP, Attorney-General, House Hansard, 24 March 2011, p. 3141.

[11]      Explanatory Memorandum, p. 1.

[12]      Explanatory Memorandum, p. 2.

CHAPTER 2 - Overview of the Bill

[1]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 1; the Hon. Robert McClelland MP, Attorney-General, House Hansard, 24 March 2011, p. 3140.

[2]        The Hon. Robert McClelland MP, Attorney-General, House Hansard, 24 March 2011, p. 3140.

[3]        Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, available at: http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-11&chapter=4&lang=en (accessed 29 July 2011).

[4]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 6.

[5]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 7.

[6]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 8. Also see Attorney-General's Department, answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 10.

[7]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 8.

[8]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 10.

[9]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 9.

[10]      Explanatory Memorandum, p. 12.

[11]      Explanatory Memorandum, p. 14.

[12]      Explanatory Memorandum, p. 14.

[13]      Explanatory Memorandum, p. 15.

[14]      Explanatory Memorandum, p. 15.

[15]      For the meaning of 'changed circumstance' see Rice and Asplund (1979) FLC 90-725.

[16]      Explanatory Memorandum, p. 2.

CHAPTER 3 - Key issues

[1]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 1.

[2]        For example, Fairness In Child Support, Submission 15, pp 4-6; Women's Legal Centre (ACT and Region), Submission 26, pp 2-3; Salt Shakers, Submission 157, p. 3; Shared Parenting Council of Australia, Submission 204, p. 20; Anglicare Victoria, Submission 253, p. 3. Also see Australian Human Rights Commission who supported proposed subsection 60B(4), and the inclusion of a legislative note referencing the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities:  Submission 254, pp 7-9.

[3]        Submission 32, p. 1.

[4]        Submission 26, p. 2.

[5]        Submission 69, Attachment 1, p. 2.

[6]        Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 9. A number of Commonwealth Acts using the same drafting convention were provided as examples.

[7]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 7.

[8]        A third argument was that proposed new subsection 60CC(2A) fetters judicial discretion: see, for example, the Family Law Practitioners Association of WA, Submission 91, pp 3-4; Family Law Practitioners' Association of Queensland, Submission 132, p. 2.

[9]        The Hon. Professor Richard Chisholm AM, Family Courts Violence Review, 27 November 2009.

[10]      Submission 203, p. 8.

[11]      Submission 113, p. 9.

[12]      Ms Donna Cooper, Continuing the critical analysis of 'meaningful relationships', (2011), 16 Aust J Fam Law 33, quoted in Professor Richard Chisholm, Submission 203, p. 8.

[13]      Submission 32, p. 3.

[14]      Submission 197, p. 4. For similar views, also see Relationships Australia, Submission 71, p. 2; Caxton Legal Centre, Submission 72, p. 4; Ms Bronwynne Luff, Submission 164, p. 1; Armadale Domestic Violence Intervention Project, Submission 179, p. 2; Immigrant Women's Support Service, Submission 181, p. 2; Delvena Women's Refuge, Submission 182.

[15]      Submission 9, p. 3. For an identical view, see Family Law Council, Submission 113, p. 4.

[16]      Submission 62, p. 10. Also see, for example, Northern Rivers Community Legal Centre, Submission 23, p. 3; Women's Legal Centre (ACT and Region), Submission 26, p. 3; Peninsula Community Legal Centre, Submission 40, p. 4; Wirringa Baiya Aboriginal Women's Legal Service, Submission 65, pp 2-3; Women's Legal Service Tasmania, Submission 70, p. 4; Caxton Legal Centre, Submission 72, p. 4; Australian Association of Social Workers, Submission 69, pp 3-4; Women Everywhere Advocating Violence Elimination, Submission 114, p. 5; Top End Women's Legal Service, Submission 176, p. 3; Shoalcoast Community Legal Centre, Submission 177, p. 3.

[17]      Submission 130, pp 3-4. Also see Victoria Police, Submission 178, p. 3; Sole Parents' Union, Submission 183, p. 3; Ms Kerry Davies, Project Worker, Council of Single Mothers and their Children, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, pp 28-29 (all of whom favoured the second option identified by Women's Legal Services Australia).

[18]      Submission 163, pp 7-8. Other submissions agreed with the concept that parental rights should be secondary to the rights of a child: see, for example, Name Withheld, Submission 97, p. 1; Name Withheld, Submission 99, p. 1; Ms Linda Tan, Ms Jennifer Walker, Ms Natalie Haddad, Ms Danielle Moglia and Ms Jessica Frearson, Submission 106, p. 3; Name Withheld, Submission 122, p. 1. Also see Justice for Children, Supplementary Submission 2, p. 1 which supported a child's right to participate in decision-making processes.

[19]      Australian Institute of Family Studies, Evaluation of the 2006 family law reforms, December 2009, p. E2. Also see Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, pp 60-61; Attorney-General's Department, answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 3; Australian Institute of Family Studies, Submission 174, p. 5.

[20]      Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 60.

[21]      For example, see Associate Professor Helen Rhoades and Professor John Dewar, Submission 9, p. 1; Professor Patrick Parkinson, Submission 14, p. 1; Associate Professor Juliet Behrens and Professor Belinda Fehlberg, Submission 32, p. 3; National Peak Body for the Safety and Protection of Parents and Children, Submission 33, p. 8; Redfern Legal Centre and Sydney Women's Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Service, Submission 48, p. 4; Women's Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Service Network, Submission 66, p. 3; Name Withheld, Submission 99, p. 3; Women's Information and Referral Exchange, Submission 112, p. 2; Name Withheld, Submission 160, p. 2; Ms Bronwynne Luff, Submission 164, p. 4; Victims of Crime Assistance League, Submission 166, p. 9; Dr Lesley Laing, Submission 197, p. 4; Professor Richard Chisholm, Submission 203, p. 12. However, note that Mr Geoff Sinclair reported that his professional experience did not accord with the findings of the Australian Institute of Family Studies: Law Council of Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 52.

[22]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 10.

[23]      A third argument was that proposed new paragraph 60CC(3)(c) is not substantially different from the 'friendly parent' provision: see Ms Zoe Rathus AM, Submission 201, p. 26.

[24]      Submission 91, p. 3 with emphasis in the original document.

[25]      Submission 173, pp 4-5.

[26]      Mr Roger Smith, Submission 45, p. 1; Men's Health Australia, Submission 60, p. 2; Name Withheld, Submission 134, pp 1-2.

[27]      Submission 107, p. 10.

[28]      Submission 80, p. 7. Also see Council of Single Mothers and their Children, Submission 74, p. 4; The Benevolent Society, Submission 131, p. 6.

[29]      Ms Kerry Davies, Council of Single Mothers and their Children, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 30.

[30]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011.

[31]      Submission 146, p. 7.

[32]      Submission 184, p. 6.

[33]      Submission 1, p. 3.

[34]      Submission 72, p. 5.

[35]      Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 33.

[36]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 10. Also see Professor Richard Chisholm, Submission 203, p. 12.

[37]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 10.

[38]      Submission 113, p. 12.

[39]      Submission 32, p. 3.

[40]      The Standing Committee of Attorneys-General has agreed to develop a national response to this inquiry. See Communiqué, 21-22 July 2011, available at: http://www.scag.gov.au/lawlink/SCAG/ll_scag.nsf/vwFiles/SCAG_Communique_21-22_July_2011_FINAL.pdf/$file/SCAG_Communique_21-22_July_2011_FINAL.pdf (accessed 25 July 2011). 

[41]      Australian Law Reform Commission and NSW Law Reform Commission, Family Violence – A National Legal Response, October 2010, p. 29.

[42]      Submission 69, p. 10.

[43]      Professor Rosalind Croucher, Australian Law Reform Commission, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 2.

[44]      Supplementary Submission 203, p. 2.

[45]      Supplementary Submission 203, p. 4. Also see Professor Patrick Parkinson who did not support proposed new paragraph 60CC(3)(k) due to the public perception of family violence orders being sought as a tactic only in family law proceedings: see Submission 14, pp 6 and 9.

[46]      Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 31. For similar expressions of support see Council of Single Mothers and their Children, answer to question on notice, received 20 July 2011; Family Law Council, answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011.

[47]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 2.

[48]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 11.

[49]      Answer to question on notice, 22 July 2011, p. 11.

[50]      For example, Name Withheld, Submission 28, p. 2; Name Withheld, Submission 92, p. 1; Family Law Council, Submission 113, p. 6; Name Withheld, Submission 118, p. 3; NSW Women's Refuge Movement, Submission 207, p. 5.

[51]      Submission 200, p. 2. Also see Australian Law Reform Commission, Submission 69, Attachment 1, p. 7; Ms Samantha Page, Family Relationship Services Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 50.

[52]      Submission 60, p. 2. Also see The One in Three Campaign, Submission 61, p. 6; Joint Parenting Association, Submission 146, p. 4.

[53]      Mrs Nicola Davies, Family Law Council, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 9. Also see Family Law Council, Submission 113, p. 10.

[54]      Submission 200, p. 2. Also see Associate Professor Juliet Behrens and Professor Belinda Fehlberg, Submission 32, p. 2. The relevant provisions are paragraph 60C(2)(b), proposed subparagraph 60D(1)(b)(ii), proposed paragraph 69ZN(5)(a) and proposed subparagraph 69ZQ(1)(i).

[55]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 6. Also see Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 58.

[56]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 7.

[57]      Submission 62, p. 8. Also see Council of Single Mothers and their Children, Submission 74, p. 3; Hawkesbury Nepean Community Legal Centre, Submission 107, p. 5; Top End Women's Legal Service, Submission 176, p. 3.

[58]      Australian Law Reform Commission and NSW Law Reform Commission, Family Violence – A National Legal Response, October 2010, p. 19.

[59]      Submission 69, p. 5. Also see, for example, Women's Legal Centre (ACT and Region), Submission 26, p. 2; Redfern Legal Centre and Sydney Women's Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Service, Submission 48, p. 2; Women's Legal Services Australia, Submission 62, p. 6; Hawkesbury Nepean Community Legal Centre, Submission 107, pp 5-7; The Benevolent Society, Submission 131, pp 3-4; Australian Association of Social Workers, Submission 173, pp 2-3; Shoalcoast Community Legal Centre, Submission 177, p. 2; Immigrant Women's Support Service, Submission 181, p. 2; Ms Zoe Rathus AM, Submission 201, p. 21; Young Lawyers, NSW Law Society, Submission 206, p. 3.

[60]      For example, Northern Rivers Community Legal Centre, Submission 23, p. 2; Name Withheld, Submission 47, p. 7; Women's Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Service Network, Submission 66, p. 2; Ms Elisabeth Peters, Submission 78, p. 1; Hawkesbury Nepean Community Legal Centre, Submission 107, p. 5; Women's Information and Referral Exchange, Submission 112, pp 1-2; Name Withheld, Submission 119, pp 2-3; Top End Women's Legal Service, Submission 176, p. 2; Shoalcoast Community Legal Centre, Submission 177, p. 1; Queensland Government, Submission 188, p. 1; Support Help & Empowerment, Submission 208, p. 2.

[61]      Submission 166, p. 8.

[62]      For example, Non-Custodial Parents Party (Equal Parenting), Submission 1, p. 2; Joint Parenting Association, Submission 146, p. 2; Mr Howard Beale, Submission 155, pp 4-5; FamilyVoice Australia, Submission 184, p. 3; Name Withheld, Submission 185, p. 1. A few submitters also commented that the amendment does not cover intimate partner violence (persons in – or previously in – a relationship but not living together): see, for example, Inner City Legal Centre, Submission 79, p. 2; ACON, Submission 93, p. 1.

[63]      Submission 91, p. 2. Also see Mr Roger Smith, Submission 45, p. 2; Name Withheld, Submission 134, p. 2; Joint Parenting Association, Submission 146, p. 3; Lone Fathers Association, Submission 190, p. 6 for similar comments.

[64]      Submission 3, p. 1. Also see Family Law Practitioners of WA, Submission 91, p. 2.

[65]      Submission 61, p. 5.

[66]      Submission 1, p. 2. Also see Fairness in Child Support, Submission 15, pp 3-4; Australian Family Association, Victoria Branch, Submission 31, p. 2; Joint Parenting Association, Submission 146, pp 2-3; Mr Howard Beale, Submission 155, p. 6.

[67]      Submission 95, p. 11.

[68]      Submission 200, p. 2. Also see Mr Geoff Sinclair, Law Council of Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 53.

[69]      The ALRC submitted that these two examples should comprise non-exclusive examples in a more generic category of economic abuse: see Submission 69, p. 4.

[70]      Professor Richard Chisholm, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 4. Also see Ms Sara Peel, Australian Law Reform Commission, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 5; Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, pp 57-58; Attorney-General's Department, answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 8.

[71]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 8. Also see Explanatory Memorandum, p. 5.

[72]      Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 3. Also see Family Law Practitioners' Association of Queensland, Submission 132, pp 2-3.

[73]      Submission 203, p. 5. Also see Family Law Council, answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 2 (who supported Professor Chisholm's proposal).

[74]      Submission 14, pp 1-2.

[75]      Submission 14, p. 3. Also see Australian Family Association, Victoria Branch, Submission 31, p. 2 for its comments regarding intent.

[76]      Ms Adut Ngor, Women's Legal Services Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 24. Also see Ms Angela Lynch, Women's Legal Services Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, pp 23-24.

[77]      Professor Richard Chisholm, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 5.

[78]      Mrs Nicola Davies, Family Law Council, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 11; Ms Kerry Davies, Council of Single Mothers and their Children, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 29.

[79]      Women's Legal Services Australia, answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, pp 3-4. Also see Dr Michael Flood, 'Fact Sheet #2: The myth of women and false accusations of domestic violence and rape and misuse of protection orders', available at: http://www.xyonline.net/content/fact-sheet-2-myth-women%E2%80%99s-false-accusations-domestic-violence-and-misuse-protection-orders (accessed 26 July 2011); Dr Michael Flood, 'Fact Sheet #1: The myth of false accusations of child abuse', available at: http://www.xyonline.net/content/fact-sheet-1-myth-false-accusations-child-abuse (accessed 26 July 2011).

[80]      Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 57; Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 7.

[81]      Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 58.

[82]      House Hansard, 30 May 2011, pp 5001-5004, available at:  http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query%3DId%3A%22legislation%2Fbillhome%2Fr4562%22 (accessed 1 August 2011).

[83]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 7.

[84]      For example, Associate Professor Juliet Behrens and Professor Belinda Fehlberg, Submission 32, p. 1; Australian Law Reform Commission, Submission 69, p. 8; Family Law Council, Submission 113, p. 6. Section 69ZK of the Act sets out the interaction between family court orders and child welfare laws.

[85]      Submission 31, p. 4. Also see National Council for Children Post Separation, Submission 172, p. 6.

[86]      Submission 114, p. 12.

[87]      Submission 74, p. 5.

[88]      Submission 202, p. 6. Also see Mrs Nicola Davies, Family Law Council, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 8.

[89]      Submission 69, p. 9. Also see Ms Samantha Page, Family Relationship Services Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 50.

[90]      Australian Law Reform Commission and NSW Law Reform Commission, Family Violence – A National Legal Response, ALRC Report No. 114, October 2010, pp 72-73. Section 69ZW of the Act deals with evidence relating to child abuse or family violence.

[91]      Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 57.

[92]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 12.

[93]      Submission 9, p. 4. Also see Family Law Council, Submission 113, p. 11.

[94]      Submission 201, p. 27.

[95]      Submission 9, pp 1-2; Submission 74, p. 5; Submission 203, p. 10, respectively.

[96]      Submission 39, p. 3.

[97]      Submission 39, p. 3. The Law Council of Australia similarly called for greater clarity in relation to the interaction between the repealed current section 60K and the proposed new section 67ZBB: see Submission 200, p. 4.

[98]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 13.

[99]      Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 13. Also see Anglicare Victoria, Submission 253, p. 4 which remarks on victims' reluctance to share their experiences.

[100]    Submission 39, p. 5. The Law Council of Australia also considered that proposed new paragraph 69ZQ(1)(aa) lacks clarity: see Submission 200, p. 4. The Family Law Council queried whether the amendment will achieve any additional benefit: see Submission 113, p. 11.

[101]    Deputy Chief Justice the Hon. John Faulks, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 32.

[102]    Submission 203, pp 10-11. Also see Australian Family Association, Victoria Branch, Submission 31, p. 4; FamilyVoice Australia, Submission 184, p. 7.

[103]    Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 61.

[104]    Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 62. The Attorney-General's Department reiterated this evidence in Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, pp 12-13.

[105]    Answer to a question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 13.

[106]    Submission 9, p. 5. Also see Ms Zoe Rathus AM, Submission 201.

[107]    For example, National Peak Body for Safety and Protection of Parents and Children, Submission 33, pp 10-11; Women's Legal Services Australia, Submission 62, p. 15; Women's Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Service Network, Submission 66, p. 4; Council of Single Mothers and their Children, Submission 74, p. 8; Hawkesbury Nepean Community Legal Centre, Submission 107, p. 13; Family Law Council, Submission 113, p. 15; Ms Carmel O'Brien, Submission 129; The Benevolent Society, Submission 131, p. 9; Australian Association of Social Workers, Submission 173, p. 8; Justice for Children, Submission 189, p. 1; BoysTown, Submission 196, p. 12.

[108]    Ms Adut Ngor, Women's Legal Services Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 25. Also see Ms Robyn Cotterell-Jones, Victims of Crime Assistance League, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 25.

[109]    Dr Elspeth McInnes, Justice for Children, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 43.

[110]    Dr Elspeth McInnes, Justice for Children, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 46. Also see Justice for Children, answers to question on notice, 11 July 2011 and 18 July 2011; Ms Lydia Lorenz, Justice for Children, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 46.

[111]    Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 36.

[112]    Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 36.

[113]    Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, pp 36-37. Also see Justice the Hon. Steven Strickland, Family Court of Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 37.

[114]    For example, Professor Patrick Parkinson, Submission 14, p. 1; Ms Christine Cherry, Submission 27, p. 1; Associate Professor Juliet Behrens and Professor Belinda Fehlberg, Submission 32, p. 1; Council of Single Mothers and their Children, Submission 74, p. 4; Name Withheld, Submission 94, p. 4; Family Law Council, Submission 113, p. 7; Ms Bronwynne Luff, Submission 164, p. 4; Armadale Domestic Violence Intervention Project, Submission 179, p. 2; Dr Lesley Laing, Submission 197, p. 4; Professor Richard Chisholm, Submission 203, p. 12; Mr Geoff Sinclair, Law Council of Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 54.

[115]    Submission 132, p. 5.

[116]    For example, Mr David Hardidge, Submission 55, p. 1; Joint Parenting Association, Submission 146, p. 6; Mr Alexander Stewart, Submission 152, p. 1; Salt Shakers, Submission 157, p. 4.

[117]    Submission 60, p. 2. Also see Name Withheld, Submission 134, p. 2; Mr Howard Beale, Submission 155, p. 5; FamilyVoice Australia, Submission 184, p. 8.

[118]    Submission 44, p. 4. Similar comments were made by the Dads4Kids Fatherhood Foundation: see Submission 95, pp 12-13.

[119]    Submission 146, p. 6.

[120]    Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 35.

[121]    Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 36.

[122]    Item 47 of Schedule 1 provides that the amendments made by Schedule 1 do not affect existing orders or constitute 'changed circumstances'.

[123]    Submission 39, p. 1. Also see Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Alert Digest No. 4 of 2011, 11 May 2011, p. 32; Deputy Chief Justice the Hon. John Faulks, Family Court of Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 31.

[124]    Submission 39, p. 2. Her Honour particularly noted the difficulties the amendment would cause for and within the Family Court of Australia (Appeal Division). Also, see Law Council of Australia, Submission 200, p. 5 for similar commentary.

[125]    Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Sixth Report of 2011, 22 June 2011, pp 296-297.

[126]    Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 32 and p. 34. His Honour noted that the Family Court of Australia instigated a number of practical arrangements to bring the 2006 family law reforms to the attention of practitioners and self-represented litigants: see p. 34.

[127]    Submission 39, p. 2.

[128]    Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, pp 56-57.

[129]    Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 14.

[130]    Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 15.

[131]    Explanatory Memorandum, p. 2.

[132]    Submission 39, p. 6. The Chief Justice noted that this is in addition to the increased workload to be effected by item 45 of Schedule 1 (the application provision).

[133]    Submission 200, p. 4.

[134]    Women's Legal Services Australia, Submission 62, p. 18. Also see Wirringa Baiya Aboriginal Women's Legal Service, Submission 65, p. 6; NSW Women's Refuge Movement, Submission 207, p. 19 for identical comments.

[135]    Attorney-General's Department, answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 5.

[136]    For example, the Law Council of Australia who supported the principles underpinning the two key features of the 2006 family law reforms mentioned in paragraph 3.143: see Mr Geoff Sinclair, Law Council of Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 53.

[137]    For example, Non-Custodial Parents Party (Equal Parenting), Submission 1, p. 2; Mr Roger Smith, Submission 45, p. 3; Professor Stephen Brown, Submission 68; Dads4Kids Fatherhood Foundation, Submission 95, p. 2; Name Withheld, Submission 101, p. 1; Name Withheld, Submission 134, p. 1; Mr Howard Beale, Submission 155, p. 1; Men's Rights Agency, Submission 170, p. 5; Lone Fathers Association, Submission 190, p. 2; Shared Parenting Council of Australia, Submission 204, p. 5.

[138]    Submission 95, p. 2.

[139]    Submission 146, p. 1. Also see Mr Barry Williams, Lone Fathers Association, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 17.

[140]    Submission 60, pp 1 and 3. Also see Mr Barry Williams, Lone Fathers Association, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 17.

[141]    For example, Associate Professor Helen Rhoades and Professor John Dewar, Submission 9, pp 5-6; Northern Rivers Community Legal Centre, Submission 23, p. 4; Women's Legal Centre (ACT and Region), Submission 26, p. 5; National Peak Body for Safety and Protection of Parents and Children, Submission 33, Attachment 3, p. 4; Peninsula Community Legal Centre, Submission 40, pp 3 and 5; Women's Legal Services Australia, Submission 62, p. 13; Council of Single Mothers and their Children, Submission 74, p. 7; Name Withheld, Submission 92, p. 1; Name Withheld, Submission 99, p. 4; Family Law Council, Submission 113, p. 14; Women  Everywhere Advocating Violence Elimination, Submission 114, p. 17; The Benevolent Society, Submission 131, p. 5; Immigrant Women's Support Service, Submission 181, p. 2. Also see Ms Bronwynne Luff, Submission 164, p. 6; Name Withheld, Submission 124, p. 1; Justice for Children, Submission 189, p. 6; Anglicare Victoria, Submission 253, p. 5. Also see Professor Richard Chisholm, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 6.

[142]    For example, the Women's Legal Centre (ACT and Region), Submission 26, pp 5-6; Wirringa Baiya Aboriginal Women's Legal Service, Submission 65, pp 4-5; Hawkesbury Nepean Community Centre, Submission 107, pp 10-11; Shoalcoast Community Legal Centre, Submission 177, p. 4. Also see Australian Institute of Family Studies, Submission 173, pp 5-6.

[143]    Explanatory Memorandum, p. 2.

[144]    The Drum Opinion, 24 March 2011, available at: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/45516.html (accessed 14 June 2011).

[145]    Submission 9, pp 6-7 with emphasis in the original document. Also see Mr Geoff Sinclair, Law Council of Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 51 for similar comments regarding community misconceptions of the shared parental responsibility provisions.

[146]    For example, see the Peninsula Community Legal Centre, Submission 40, p. 5; Caxton Legal Centre, Submission 72, p. 7; Ms Linda Tan, Ms Jennifer Walker, Ms Natalie Haddad, Ms Danielle Moglia and Ms Jessica Frearson, Submission 106, p. 4; Family Law Council, Submission 113, pp 15-16.

[147]    Supplementary Submission 203, p. 1.

[148]    Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 7.

[149]    Standing Committee of Attorneys-General, Communiqué, 21-22 July 2011.

[150]    Mr Geoff Sinclair, Law Council of Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 52.

[151]    Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 57.

[152]    Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 14.

[153]    For example, see the Attorney-General's Department, answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 14 where the Attorney-General expressed the view that item 48 of Schedule 1 did not comprise an inappropriate delegation of legislative power as the provision did not affect the substantive operation of the measures proposed in the Bill.

[154]    Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 57.

[155]    Mrs Toni Pirani, Attorney-General's Department, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 56; Answer to question on notice, received 22 July 2011, p. 15.

[156]    Professor Rosalind Croucher, Australian Law Reform Commission, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, pp 6-7.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS BY COALITION SENATORS -  

[1]        Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 3.

[2]         Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 31.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS BY THE AUSTRALIAN GREENS -  

[1]        Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee, Inquiry into Provisions of the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Bill 2005, March 2006, Submission 14, p. 1.

[2]        Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee, Inquiry into Provisions of the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Bill 2005, March 2006, Dissenting Report by the Australian Democrats and the Australian Greens.

[3]        Submission 203, p. 23.

[4]        Submission 203, p. 24.

[5]        Submission 203, pp 4-5.

[6]        Submission 62, p. 12.

[7]        Family Law Council, Submission 113, p. 10.

[8]        Ms Angela Lynch, Women's Legal Services Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 22.

[9]        Women's Legal Services Australia, Submission 62, p. 12.

[10]      Submission 9, p. 3.

[11]      Submission 113, p. 9.

[12]      Mrs Nicola Davies, Family Law Council, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 9.

[13]      Ms Angela Lynch, Women's Legal Services Australia, Committee Hansard, 8 July 2011, p. 22.

[14]      Submission 9, p. 3.

[15]      For example, see Northern Rivers Community Legal Centre, Submission 23, p. 3; Women's Legal Centre (ACT and Region), Submission 26, p. 3; Peninsula Community Legal Centre, Submission 40, p. 4; Wirringa Baiya Aboriginal Women's Legal Service, Submission 65, pp 2-3; Women's Legal Service Tasmania, Submission 70, p. 4; Caxton Legal Centre, Submission 72, p. 4; Australian Association of Social Workers, Submission 69, pp 3-4; Women Everywhere Advocating Violence Elimination, Submission 114, p. 5; Top End Women's Legal Service, Submission 176, p. 3; Shoalcoast Community Legal Centre, Submission 177, p. 3.

[16]      Submission 9, p. 3.

[17]      Submission 62, p. 9.

[18]      Australian Law Reform Commission and NSW Law Reform Commission, Family Violence – A National Legal Response, October 2010, para 5.200.

[19]      Submission 69, p. 5.

[20]      Submission 62, p. 7.

[21]      Submission 69, p. 5.

[22]      Quoted in Women's Legal Services Australia, Submission 62, p. 7.

[23]      Submission 62, p. 15.

[24]      Submission 62, p. 15.

[25]      Submission 62, p. 16.

[26]      Explanatory Memorandum, p. 1.