MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS
Ms STEGGALL (Warringah) (11:26): The Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commission's 2026 Yearly report to parliament makes one thing painfully clear: Australia does not lack recommendations or plans, but what we do lack is implementation, accountability and the basic ability to measure whether women and children are actually becoming safer in Australia. The evidence is devastating.
In 2025, the police recorded 39,758 victims of sexual assault. Of course, that is only what is reported. Of those, 80 per cent were female, and more than half were under 18.
Breaches of domestic and family violence orders have increased. Persistent homelessness amongst women and children affected by family violence remains deeply concerning, and the outcomes for First Nations women and children are particularly alarming. The intimate partner homicide rates for First Nations women have increased in both years since the national plan baseline.
The commission itself says governments have increased investment, but change is not happening with the impact or pace required. It identifies sexual violence and the family law and justice systems as persistent areas of harm and calls for stronger and earlier intervention, recovery support, evidence and accountability. That accountability gap is quite extraordinary.
In its 2025 reporting, the commission found that the national plan had 131 performance measures, yet 89 of those—some 68 per cent—couldn't actually be measured. It's insane. More than half cannot even be measured, yet these are performance measures.
How can governments credibly assess progress when most of the indicators still lack a usable data source? In Warringah, I've heard from frontline organisations including the Northern Beaches Women's Shelter, Mary's House Services, Women and Children First, the Women's Resilience Centre, Dalwood Spilstead, LocalKind and many, many others. They describe rising demand, inadequate crisis and transitional housing, complex legal and migration issues and services stretched well beyond capacity.
Northern Beaches Women's Shelter told us demand had risen from about 12 women a day in 2020 to more than 70 a day now. In one year, it housed 273 women and children but had to turn away around 584 women. Now we have another stark example.
Mary's House Services has been supporting women and children escaping violence in Sydney's north for more than a decade. In 2025, it recorded a 63 per cent increase in referrals. In 2025-26, it had to decline 176 refuge accommodation referrals because there was no vacancy.
Mary's House Services applied for federal funding to purchase and upgrade to a second refuge to increase their capacity and stop turning women away, and that application was unsuccessful. I met with the minister, and on technicalities—and, I would have to say, a deeply frustrating administrative process—it was rejected. So in the face of overwhelming need, a demand, a solution, a fit-for-purpose proposal, still it was not possible for the government and for the system to support that application.
The organisation was able to proceed only because philanthropic donors stepped in to fund the property and establish that second refuge. That's unacceptable. Why is it that government can, at the drop of a hat, find billions for submarines, hundreds of millions of dollars for industries because they happen to be in an electorate that they are trying to preserve their vote, but, when organisations are trying to get funding for a proposal that makes sense, that addresses an immediate need, administratively, it just can't get over the line?
Even now, there is still no government funding committed to operate the second refuge for Mary's House despite all that overwhelming demand. Frontline services should not have to rely on whether there are generous donors and philanthropic support to fill gaps in an essential crisis accommodation. So respectfully to the government, it's not good enough what you're doing because the system is not delivering the funding when there are clear applications for it.
Governments point to increased investments, but funding announcements are not outcomes. The commission's investment mapping shows that around 68 per cent of Commonwealth investment is going to response, while just 11 per cent is directed to prevention and only nine per cent to intervention. If we're serious about ending violence, we must intervene earlier and fund the services that actually keep women and children safe when they are trying to leave.
Services need secure, indexed, multiyear funding based on unmet demand. A woman escaping violence should not have to choose between returning to an abusive home or becoming homeless. Governments must also recognise that economic safety is part of physical safety.
Child support, family tax benefit, taxation, social security, migration, family law systems can all be weaponised after separation. Systems must protect victim-survivors, not create new avenues for coercive control. Children must also be treated as victim-survivors, with age-appropriate therapeutic support, stable housing, continuity at school and services designed around their own recovery.
We know prevention must start earlier. That means sustained consent and respectful relationship education, healthy masculinity programs and working with men and boys before violence escalates. This must include regulating environments that increase risk.
Alcohol is one of those areas where the government is just turning a blind eye. They can act now. In fact, two years ago the rapid review called for stronger action on alcohol-related harm, including alcohol delivery hours.
The government is aware of it. I know the minister and assistant minister are aware of it, but where is the reform? Two years on, still nothing.
South Australia has now introduced legislation that would restrict same-day alcohol delivery to between 10 am and 10 pm, and require a minimum two-hour pause between purchase and delivery. There is a direct link between access to alcohol and increased rates of domestic and family violence and police call-outs. The South Australian government has explicitly linked those changes to recommendations from its Royal Commission into Domestic Family and Sexual Violence.
That's a practical prevention reform other jurisdictions need to urgently get on to. Governments have ample evidence about the connection between alcohol-related harm and violence in the home. We need stronger accountability for people who use violence.
Achieving this will require better enforcement of domestic violence orders, stronger information-sharing across jurisdictions, more effective monitoring of high-risk offenders. Why do we still not have a national domestic violence offender register so that serious offending does not simply disappear when someone crosses a state border? How is it that offenders still have access to dating apps where no true proper identification verification is required in accessing those platforms, which make them directly dangerous?
Sexual violence also needs its own properly resourced implementation stream. The Australian Law Reform Commission has already made 64 recommendations to improve justice responses to sexual violence. Those recommendations need a clear implementation pathway, deadlines and public reporting.
The same applies to this government's rapid review. Every outstanding recommendation should have a responsible minister, an identified funding pathway, a deadline for implementation and a public measure of success. The Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commission itself needs stronger powers.
It should be able to obtain the information it needs, monitor implementation across governments and publicly report on whether commitments have actually been delivered. That is why so many are calling for a royal commission. Only a royal commission will actually shine a light on the lack of implementation and action by governments.
We hear announcements of money allocated; we never hear the actual implementation of other specific measures. We don't actually get that accountability. Domestic and family violence can't be treated as a social services issue alone.
It cuts across housing, justice, health, education, communications, migration, taxation, social security and the economy. When that responsibility is fragmented, the accountability disappears. Gaps between departments become gaps in safety.
If governments continue to fail to implement the recommendations already before them, then there is no other option than a royal commission to actually shine a light on government inaction. A royal commission can compel evidence across agencies and jurisdictions, examine where services are failing and establish who is responsible when known risks are not acted upon.
We know that works when it comes to terrorism and other actions. It is time women's and children's safety is given the same level of urgency.