LNP and independents deliver child abuse justice in Queensland

The amendment extended the definition of child abuse to include children who were abused in non-institutional settings such as foster care or other domestic settings.

Attorney-general Yvette D’Ath opposed the re-opening of unfair deeds claiming it could lead to ‘unintended consequences’.

But shadow attorney-general Ian Walker introduced his amendment to allow unfair deeds to be re-opened saying ‘it is the right thing to do’ and ‘restores justice to the victims’.

Mr Walker said the amendments to the Government Bill provided ‘the same rights’ given to abuse survivors who had never sued in the past because their cases were statute barred.

He told the Parliament that two safety measures were built into the Bill to ensure fairness.

First, deeds can only be re-opened if a court finds it is ‘just and reasonable to do so’.

Secondly, documents associated with deeds will also be re-opened, so that insurers are brought back to the table to negotiate a fair settlement that is not affected by the time limits defence.

This provision means institutions will not be stranded without insurance cover to pay a re-opened claim.

The Opposition needed support from at least three of the independent members who hold the balance of power in the Queensland parliament to pass the amendments.

Independents Rob Pyne, Billy Gordon and the two Katter Australia Party members Robbie Katter and Shane Knuth all backed the amendment and the groundbreaking reform was carried on the voices.

The minority Labor government did not seek a division to challenge the amendment because it did not have the numbers to oppose them.

Independent member for Cairns Rob Pyne had championed even more progressive legislation that was supported almost unanimously via submissions from individuals and non-government organisations to a parliamentary inquiry.

The Pyne Bill was supported in the Parliament by the other independent members but neither major party supported his Bill.

Mr Pyne said he was deeply concerned that the government was putting the interest of offending institutions ahead of innocent children who were known to be in danger.

“This House should be holding offending institutions to account, not protecting them from the proper consequences of their misconduct,” he said.