Protecting Queenslanders from Violent and Child Sex Offenders Amendment Bill 2018

Moved the second reading on behalf of the bill's sponsor, arguing the bill is necessary to address gaps in Labor's laws for supervising dangerous sex offenders like Robert John Fardon, and that indeterminate supervision orders with GPS monitoring are essential for community protection.

“Repeat sexual offenders pose a degree of risk until the day they die. One only needs to look at a repeat offender's history to understand this. There should never be a day when a repeat offender is considered risk free.”— 2020-09-08View Hansard

As Attorney-General, opposed the bill arguing it risks undermining the constitutionally robust DP(SO) Act, could render the entire framework invalid if challenged, and that existing laws provide strong mandatory reporting obligations that are not voluntary.

“If DPSO legislation that has stood the test of time, become the framework for every other jurisdiction in country and is the framework on which the terrorism laws in this country are based... we put the children of Queensland at risk because we tear up the DPSO legislation that is fundamental to protecting our community.”— 2020-09-08View Hansard

Argued the bill is necessary because self-reporting systems are inadequate for offenders like Robert John Fardon who have no respect for the law, and that GPS monitoring for life reflects community expectations for protecting children.

“What the people want is to see the likes of Robert John Fardon restrained. They want to know that their children and loved ones are safe from the likes of Robert John Fardon, who has a consistent history of always reoffending when given the opportunity.”— 2020-09-08View Hansard

Argued the bill is unnecessary as existing legislation is adequate, cited the Bar Association and Queensland Law Society submissions expressing concerns about transferring judicial powers to the executive, and referenced judicial findings that Robert Fardon posed low risk of reoffending.

“There is absolutely no need for this legislation, and I will be urging members of this House to vote against this totally unnecessary piece of legislation.”— 2020-09-08View Hansard

Supported the bill arguing Labor's post-conviction monitoring laws are weak because GPS tracking only applies after concerning conduct occurs, whereas the LNP would ensure repeat offenders are GPS tracked for life from release.

“Under the LNP, repeat dangerous sex offenders would be GPS tracked for life. Under Labor, they might be GPS tracked only for a short while and only if they commit concerning conduct.”— 2020-09-08View Hansard

As Minister for Child Safety, opposed the bill arguing it could expose current community protection laws to constitutional challenge, that GPS monitoring alone provides false security without other measures, and that legislation must be robust to actually protect children.

“When I speak to a person who has been sexually assaulted, when I speak to a person whose life has been ruined... I want to be able to say to them, hand on heart, that this government has put in place the laws that are going to protect them.”— 2020-09-08View Hansard

Supported the bill arguing Labor's reactive supervision approach is inadequate, citing the case of Robert Fardon being allowed to roam unsupervised, and advocating for mandatory GPS tracking from release until death for repeat offenders.

“The LNP supports mandatory GPS tracking of offenders from the day they are released until the day they die. Paedophiles cannot be trusted to self-report to police.”— 2020-09-08View Hansard

As Police Minister, opposed the bill arguing it recklessly risks the nation's protective laws, and criticised the LNP for reducing child sex offender reporting periods from 15 years to 5 years when in government in 2014, removing monitoring from 1,723 offenders.

“Who is weak on child sex offenders? Who is soft on child sex offenders? Those opposite were the only government in Queensland history that reduced reporting periods for child sex offenders.”— 2020-09-08View Hansard

Supported the bill arguing it is the role of parliamentarians to protect those without a voice, and that the bill's proposals for indeterminate supervision, GPS tracking, and restrictions on where offenders can live are reasonable measures that should not be derided.

“Who could credibly argue that having a GPS tracker on someone who has offended and caused so much harm could somehow be a violation and we should not attempt to do it to protect our most vulnerable?”— 2020-09-08View Hansard

Opposed the bill arguing Queensland's existing DP(SO) Act is constitutionally robust and used as a model by other jurisdictions, and that the bill inappropriately transfers powers from the Supreme Court to the Governor in Council, showing the LNP does not understand separation of powers.

“As lawmakers we do not get second chances in this area of law, particularly the importance of this area of law in keeping our children safe. In order to protect the community, the law in this area must be constitutionally robust and it must be valid.”— 2020-09-08View Hansard