Concerns scupper change to family law

The Coalition and conservative-leaning crossbenchers have voted down Labor’s controversial overhaul to the Family Law Act in the lower house.

Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus. Picture: Getty Images

The Coalition and conservative-leaning crossbenchers have voted against Labor’s controversial overhaul to the Family Law Act in the lower house amid concerns the changes could have a damaging affect on families.

Labor is pushing to abolish the presumption of shared responsibility in court disputes and slash the number of factors used by courts when deciding the best parenting arrangements for a child from 15 to six “best interest” considerations as part of a major overhaul of the Family Law Act.

These changes have been criticised by some family law experts who warn the amendments are a radical change which could take Australia back to when mothers were granted primacy in custody battles.

Opposition legal affairs spokeswoman Michaelia Cash said the government was attempting to rush through significant changes to the Family Law Act without “any scrutiny” after Labor took the bill to a vote in the lower house before an inquiry into the legislation had occurred.

“Our most significant concern is that Labor’s Family Law Bill would repeal the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility that applies when courts make parenting orders,” Senator Cash said. “This proposal could have significant implications for Australian families and needs to be very closely scrutinised.

“These changes go further than what was recommended by the Australian Law Reform Commission and there has been no review to assess the impact of Labor’s changes,” Senator Cash said.

While the bill was supported by the Greens and teal, independents Rebekha Sharkie and Dai Le voted against the government.

Ms Sharkie expressed concern the bill in its current form would lead to a return to a time when mothers were given primacy in parenting arrangements.

“The consequences of the bill are potentially very significant, particularly in relation to the changes to the presumption of shared care,” Ms Sharkie told The Australian.

“I am concerned that we may see a return to family law outcomes from the 1980s and ’90s where fathers, at best, were awarded contact every second weekend and alternate Wednesday nights for a meal. Without the deep dive that a bill inquiry provides, I did not feel confident to vote in favour of the proposed changes.”

Fowler MP Dai Lee said family law was complex and “often fraught with emotions” and that she was hopeful to support the bill with amendments following the inquiry.

“The bill will go to the committee and amendments have to go through to make it somewhat less complex,” Ms Le said. “I hope I can support it once I’m certain that there won’t be unintended consequences for families in Fowler.”

Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said the bill had already been subject to significant scrutiny, and argued the opposition had previous opportunities to refer the bill to an inquiry in March.