Posts

No Excuse for Abuse: Protecting Children Must Come First

,

I raised with the Director of Public Prosecutions, Ms Raelene Sharpe, the facts of a recent State case in which the sentencing judge stated that a convicted paedophile received a reduced sentence because the offender came from a culture where sexual offences against children were more tolerated.

I asked what the prosecution’s stance would be if such an offence were to come before a Commonwealth court and was informed that a Commonwealth judge would also take cultural factors into account during sentencing.

I found this deeply concerning, as I believe sexual offences against children are among the most serious crimes. In my view, an offender’s cultural background should not diminish the gravity of such offences.

— Senate Estimates | October 2025

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: Turning to another case, I’m alarmed by the recent trend in some states to reduce sentences for heinous crimes because of historical cultural experiences. I’ll get to the federal implications here. One recent state case—this is a state case I’m citing— involved a person from overseas who was convicted of child sexual offences and had his sentence reduced because the trial judge felt that, because of his previous exposure to such activity, it would be unfair for him to be severely punished if he believed what he was doing was not seriously wrong. I think that’s horrified a lot of Australians, and constituents have contacted us. Since when has the law reduced sentences simply because the defendant thought it was okay to commit sexual offences against children?  

Ms Sharp: I’m not sure that that’s how the law operates; you’ve conflated a number of factors. When a sentence is imposed—I am really speaking about the role of courts here, which is outside my direct operation. When courts are determining what sentence to impose, they consider a whole range of factors. Many of those are set out in the Crimes Act, but some are set out by the common law, by the courts as they develop the law of sentencing over time. Those factors include the personal circumstances of both the victim and the offender.  

Senator ROBERTS: A lot of our constituents would be very upset with the decision. They’re telling us they are. They think the judiciary needs to be re-educated, but that’s not for you; I accept that. Can you reassure the Australian public that such a claim would not result in a similar discount if the offence was a Commonwealth one?  

Ms Sharp: Senator, I’m not sure precisely what the claim is. I can say that we make submissions to courts about what we think the appropriate sentence is—what we think are the appropriate factors relevant to sentencing, but those factors do include the personal circumstances of an offender. That’s simply the state of the law, and that’s set out in the provisions of the Crimes Act which deal with how sentences are to be imposed in relation to federal offences.  

Senator ROBERTS: Isn’t it pretty clear cut that molesting a child, sexually abusing a child, sexually assaulting a child, is exactly that? The law would be pretty clear cut on that, wouldn’t it?  

Ms Sharp: Is exactly an offence? Yes, it is an offence.  

Senator ROBERTS: And the sentence would be lessened if the male comes from a country where paedophilia is allowed? 

 Ms Sharp: No. Senator, I’m not sure of the particular details of the case about which you’re speaking. At a general level, at a high level, the personal circumstances of an offender are relevant to determining what the appropriate sentence is for every case. It’s not a question of whether that lessens the gravity of the offence. It’s just one of the factors that go into the mix in determining what is the appropriate sentence for a particular matter.  

Senator ROBERTS: I’m at a loss for words. Anyway, thank you very much. 

/by

Labor/Greens reject mandatory sentencing for Paedophiles

,

Labor, Greens, Centre Alliance and Jacqui Lambie last night voted down a Bill for mandatory sentencing for paedophiles. One Nation voted strongly in support of this Bill.

Transcript

Thank you, Mr. Acting Deputy President. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I don’t serve just voters, I serve everyone who is a resident of Queensland and Australia. And that especially includes those who don’t vote because they’re too young.

I won’t go over the statistics, the gory details because they are horrific. Other speakers have done this from both sides of the chamber but I do serve the young. And why do I serve the young? Because the abuse of children is not only the most heinous crime.

It is also the destruction of our nation’s future. As I see it, the child, especially the young child up to about six is the embodiment of our universe. It is the ultimate expression of our universe. The lovely eyes of a child, and what is going on in the heart of that child from zero to six are the critical years.

According to Maria Montessori, he has done more work than anyone else ever on the development and behaviour of humans. And she says that zero to six are the critical years for the development of intellect and character. And some mongrel comes in and steals that person’s development, that young child’s development.

And I did look at yesterday and the day before, when I was in the Hunter Valley with Stuart Bonds, and we were helping some people who are victims at adult of corporate crimes, group crimes. And Stuart and his wife Sini have a lovely daughter called Penny.

And Penny is an absolute delight. Eye shining, heart pumping, asking questions. She’s only two and a half, but speaks like a four year old, speaks like an adult in many ways, full sentences. And I was just marvelling at that lovely little human, the embodiment of her universe, combined with the human spirit.

As Tom Peters said the renowned management expert, he said many years ago, and I’ll always remember this. “The height of our civilization is the four year old.” There’s developing, but they haven’t been corrupted by our society yet. And yet children need to be protected.

They’re naive, worse than that or more important than that, they’re innocent. And they can be preyed upon. They’re weak and vulnerable in many ways, despite that sparkle and that energy. And when somebody molests a young child, they’re doing enormous damage, lasting damage, terrible damage.

They’re not doing it just to the child because the child’s pain, plays out for the rest of her or his life. That is terrible. But then what happens to that pain? Is it sometimes gets transferred to other people when that child becomes an adult.

And so on the handing down of that pain, a lifetime of pain, a cost in sorting out that person’s problem sometimes later on the costs that are borne by our society, the cost that can be born by other individuals. And that is a huge cost to our society. So every way we look at this, this bill must go forward.

We know that sentences on paedophiles are not tough enough. We know that judges are being weak and society is not dealing with this vital issue anywhere near adequately. We must have much more serious sentencing because judges have shown they have been weak.

Now we’ve had questions about this bill, Senator Hanson and I have listened intensely to the Labour Shadow Minister for the Shadow Attorney General. And he made some good points, provided us with some data.

We then went to the Attorney General and listened to the Attorney General, reassured us on those points, reassured us on the checks and balances in this bill, because these are the worst of criminals, but they still need to be treated fairly and within the law.

This bill, as it is now sends a powerful message to the scum of our society, the absolute scum and dregs of our society. We must be tough on those who hurt the weak, who hurt the vulnerable, who hurt our kids. Our kids are the future. Our kids deserve to be free from this scum.

We are voting in favour of this bill because of our kids and I commend this bill to the Senate.

/by