Limitation of Actions (Institutional Child Sexual Abuse) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016

As Attorney-General moved the second reading of the government bill to retrospectively abolish limitation periods for institutional child sexual abuse claims, introduce a class actions regime, close the LPITAF fund and permanently embed JPs in QCAT, indicating in-principle support for opposition amendments on non-institutional abuse but opposing amendments on reopening settled deeds.

“Victims of institutional child sexual abuse have waited long enough to see the shadow of the limitation period removed to allow their claims to be determined on their merits.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Premier introduced the bill, framing it as a historic reform to remove the limitation period for survivors of institutional child sexual abuse to lodge legal claims, and to establish a class action framework in Queensland.

“The purpose of this bill is to finally take the necessary steps to provide increased access to justice for survivors of institutional child sexual abuse. We will do this by retrospectively removing the limitation period for when a legal claim can be made.”— 2016-08-16View Hansard

Welcomed the core principle of removing the statute of limitations for institutional sexual abuse but considered the government bill inadequate as it leaves out victims of serious physical abuse and non-institutional abuse, and does not revoke past unjust settlements.

“The opposition amendments are better than the government's bill but they do not go far enough, as they also do not meet community expectations. They should include physical abuse.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

As shadow Attorney-General supported the government bill but moved amendments to broaden the scope to non-institutional sexual abuse and allow courts to set aside past deeds of settlement where just and reasonable, arguing the bill would otherwise create two classes of survivors.

“The LNP believes that, by restricting the removal of the statute of limitations to only certain cases of child sexual abuse, there is an effective creation of two classes of survivors. That would be patently unfair.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

As committee chair supported the government bill, noting the committee's unanimous endorsement, and thanked the Attorney-General for accepting the non-government recommendation to extend the scope beyond institutional settings.

“This bill will provide the opportunities for victims of child sexual abuse to go back in time beyond the usual statute of limitations and seek settlements for the wrongs that have been perpetrated against them.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill with the opposition's amendments, noting the committee's unanimous support and appreciating the Attorney-General's in-principle support for extending the scope beyond institutional settings, while regretting the rejection of the amendment allowing courts to reopen deeds of settlement.

“The opposition supports the passing of the bill, with amendments.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill as providing increased access to justice for survivors of institutional child sexual abuse by retrospectively removing the limitation period.

“The current period is inadequate to allow victims of childhood sexual abuse to even come to terms with their abuse on a personal level, let alone to find the enormous strength needed to address their pain, to move forward and to commence the daunting and often arduous task of commencing litigation in the courts.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill with the non-government recommendations, arguing for extension beyond institutional settings and for allowing courts to reopen past deeds of settlement, citing her experience as former shadow child safety minister and as a nurse.

“This legislation is a step in the right direction. I hope that the amendments help in the journey to justice.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill's key reforms, including removing limitation periods and establishing class actions, acknowledging the importance of allowing victims access to justice.

“Through the royal commission process and the mountain of evidence it is clear that there is definitely a need for victims of these heinous crimes to be able to access justice, and that is what we are doing here today.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government's watershed bill making four fundamental reforms to the law, including removing limitation periods for child sexual abuse claims, introducing class actions, and making the JP QCAT trial permanent.

“I am very pleased to see that there is unanimous support for the concept of removing the limitation period for actions for damages for personal injuries associated with child sexual abuse.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill with LNP amendments, arguing the bill without amendments creates two classes of survivors and does not adequately deal with deeds of settlement used by institutions as blocking mechanisms.

“It is hard to rationalise that the suffering by a child abused in an institution is different from that of a child abused by a parent or neighbour.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill as providing victims of institutional child sexual abuse with a voice and removing an unfair barrier to justice.

“With the passing of this bill, victims of child sexual abuse within an institutional context will have limitation periods removed. Even more importantly, this will apply retrospectively so as to include any past victims of institutional child sexual abuse.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill and highlighted the importance of widening the definition beyond institutional settings and allowing prior deeds of settlements to be reopened, arguing instances of child sexual abuse do not just occur in institutions.

“The evidence was so overwhelming and broadly given in the context that I note that all members of the committee, including the government members, urged the government to act on that.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Strongly supported the government bill, citing personal connections to survivors including a friend Brian Laing who worked on this issue for many years, and recalling former prime minister Kevin Rudd's 2009 apology to the forgotten Australians.

“It is a very proud moment to be standing here today speaking to this bill.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the bill as a step in the right direction but advocated for the LNP amendments to extend to non-institutional abuse and to allow courts to reopen deeds of settlement where they were not just or fair.

“This legislation cannot undo the harm, but it can provide avenues of redress that were previously denied due to the passage of time.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill with the LNP amendments extending the removal of limitations to survivors of non-institutional abuse and giving courts the ability to reopen previous deeds of settlement.

“On this side of the House, we favour supporting the government's bill as opposed to the private member's bill, but we also believe amendments to the government's bill that extend the removal of the limitation on claims to survivors of non-institutional abuse, give the court the ability to open previous deeds of settlement entered into upon application to do so and ensure that the inherent jurisdiction of the court is maintained in this process are also important considerations.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

As Minister for Child Safety, strongly supported the government bill as an historic day for Queensland and the first significant step in civil litigation reforms.

“For far too long, survivors have been unable to access justice simply because time has passed. From the royal commission we know that it takes survivors an average of 22 years to disclose abuse.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill based on personal connections to Lotus Place members in Mackay who shared their experiences of childhood institutional care.

“This bill is a vital step in the recognition that society recognises their suffering and gives them an avenue to justice.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the legislation, hoping the government would be open to the LNP amendments to extend the limitations to those who suffered abuse outside institutional settings, drawing on his experience as former assistant minister for child safety and as a board member of Bravehearts.

“I am absolutely in support of the legislation... My sincere hope is that when we get to consideration in detail the government will be open to some of the proposed changes in terms of extending the limitations to also include those who suffered abuse other than institutional abuse.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill, sharing the stories of 11 men who were victims of abuse at BoysTown in his electorate and highlighting the inadequacy of previous redress payments under the Forde inquiry scheme.

“Lifting the statute of limitations of three years, having the ability to mount class actions and making the legislation retrospective are sensible changes.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill, dedicating his speech to his uncle Bruce Grundy, whose journalism in the 1990s broke the story of decades of abuse at St Joseph's orphanage at Neerkol.

“I am sure that if it were not for the work of my uncle during those early days of the 1990s when he was the editor at the independent newspaper and broke the story of Neerkol not only to Queenslanders but also to the world, perhaps this legislation would not be debated tonight.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

As Leader of the Opposition strongly supported the bill while foreshadowing LNP amendments to address the two classes of survivors created by restricting the bill to institutional settings and to allow courts to reopen unfairly settled deeds.

“This is legislation that puts the focus of this debate sharply on the survivor and it is long overdue... At the heart of our amendments is fairness.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the bill with the LNP amendments, arguing the bill in its current form creates categories of survivors and does not adequately address deeds of settlement.

“The survivors of this abuse, no matter the context in which it occurred, deserve the opportunity to seek justice in their own time and when they are ready and capable of facing the perpetrators of these actions without unreasonable fear or pressure of a time line that only applies to some.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

As Minister for Main Roads, wholeheartedly supported the bill, acknowledging the work of former prime minister Julia Gillard in establishing the royal commission and praising the generational shift in values the bill represents.

“Removing the statute of limitations is absolutely necessary. In fact, it is amazing that the law was so antiquated and so restrictive for so long.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the retrospective abolition of limitation periods and class actions provisions, but opposed the opposition amendment to reopen private settlements citing concerns about unintended consequences.

“Supporting the victims of this abuse should always be paramount, as should providing them with access to civil remedies including compensation. That is what this bill seeks to achieve.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

As Minister for Health, strongly supported the bill's four main reforms, drawing on his previous experience as Attorney-General removing the limitation period for asbestos-related diseases.

“Although not central to this bill, the law was changed then as the law is being changed tonight—and it will be changed—because it is a just and right thing to do.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard

Supported the government bill, emphasising access to justice as the critical value driving the legislation and sharing stories of survivors including a personal friend.

“Importantly, the bill will create a more accessible civil litigation system for survivors of child sexual abuse and—the critical part—enhance access to justice.”— 2016-11-08View Hansard