Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (10:33): I rise to make a contribution to the Criminal Law Consolidation (Sexual Predation Offences) Amendment Bill brought in by the shadow attorney-general, the member for Heysen.

This bill seeks to strengthen the protections afforded to victims of sexually predatory behaviour. The bill would amend the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (the act) to create a regulatory framework that would make it easier for victims of sexual predation to pursue a conviction against the offender. Currently, spiking of food or beverages is criminalised under section 32C of the act; a person is guilty of an offence if the person adds a substance to a food or beverage intending to cause impairment of another person's consciousness without their knowledge. The bill would provide for new offences for the possession and/or administration of a prescribed sexual predation drug or liquor to another person in circumstances that meet the definition of a prescribed interaction.

The bill would increase the penalties that apply to the existing spiking offence; for example, an offence against new section 42(1) would incur a maximum penalty of 10 years' imprisonment, whereas the existing penalty under section 32C of the act is three years—a significant lift in the maximum penalty. Clause 4 would add new sections 41, 42 and 43 to the act. New section 41 defines conduct that falls outside the scope of a sexual predation offence, including if the victim lawfully consented to the conduct or if the conduct lies within the limits of what would be generally accepted in the community as normal incidents of social interaction or community life.

Doing an investigation of new section 42, it would provide for sexual predation offences as follows. With regard to new section 42(1), under the offence, administering a prescribed sexual predation drug to another person in a prescribed interaction, in a prescribed place, the maximum penalty for a basic offence is 10 years; for an aggravated offence, 12 years; for an offence against a victim under the age of 17, 15 years; and for an offence against the victim under the age of 14, life.

Under new section 42(2), the offence of administering or supplying liquor to another person intending to make them vulnerable to sexual assault will be penalised with eight years' imprisonment for a basic offence; for an aggravated offence, 10 years; for an offence against the victim under the age of 17, 12 years; and for an offence against a victim under the age of 14, there is a 15-year penalty.

Under new section 42(3), possession of a sexual predation drug in a prescribed place or prescribed interaction, there is an eight-year maximum penalty. Under new section 42(6), for possession of a prescription or controlled drug capable of producing a state of intoxication and not labelled in a legally compliant manner, in a prescribed licensed premises between 9pm on any day and 5am on the next day, there is a five-year penalty to be imposed. They are just some of the penalties that are being lifted to protect people in regard to these terrible offences.

New section 43 would provide for alternative verdicts if a jury is not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that a charge for a sexual predation offence has been established. If the judge has instructed the jury that it is open to the jury to find the defendant guilty of a lesser offence and the jury is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the lesser offence has been established, the jury may return a verdict that the defendant is not guilty of the offence charged but is guilty of the lesser offence.

The remaining subsections of new section 42 would establish defences and exemptions for the listed offences and defined terms used in the section. Clause 3 would amend section 32C of the act to remove any reference to sexual predation offences that are now covered by new section 42. Schedule 1 of the bill would make related amendments to the Child Safety (Prohibited Persons) Act 2016, the Child Sex Offenders Registration Act 2006, the Evidence Act 1929 and the Sentencing Act 2017.

This is very sensible legislation that has been put to this place by the member for Heysen, the shadow attorney-general. I think it should be supported across the board. I want to talk about a drug that is used in the agricultural industry that is one of the drugs, from what I understand, that we are trying to rule against here, which is a drug called Rohypnol.

For the shearing industry, and back in the day when I did it, we did not see landowners or shearing contractors using Rohypnol as they are now allowed to do under very strict regulation—extremely strict regulation. What it is used for is to quieten rams down, so that you can shear them without getting kicked to death. I did not get kicked to death, but I got kicked around a bit at times shearing rams.

The availability of Rohypnol is extremely highly regulated, and it is about registering a number of rams that need to be shorn at a particular shed or sometimes contractors, from my understanding, would have to say, 'We have these sheds this week, and we have this many rams.' They might be allowed to have only several—maybe two or three—extra doses just in case there is an extra ram or two that comes through. I believe now that a shearer can refuse to shear a ram unless it is injected.

This drug is something that obviously creates impairment—and this is just one use of it in the agricultural industry—and that is why it is so, so heavily regulated, and is only given to the farmers themselves under very strict guidelines or shearing contractors operating in the shearing industry. I commend the bill introduced by the member for Heysen and seek its support in this house and the other place, and seek its speedy passage.

Showing 1 reaction

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.