Australia had a national reckoning over domestic violence, but where’s the focus this election?
- Written by: Kate Fitz-Gibbon, Professor (Practice), Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University
For most of this federal election campaign, politicians have said very little about violence against women and children.
Now in the fourth week of the five-week campaign, Labor has released its “commitment to women[1]” announcement. The Coalition[2] has also flagged it will have something to say on the topic before polling day.
Much of Labor’s announcement is about what the party has already done to address women’s safety, including funding already committed under the National Plan To End Violence Against Women and Children[3]. The announcement concedes “there is much more to do[4]” and highlights extra spending on financial abuse[5] and perpetrator interventions specifically.
But the fact domestic, family and sexual violence hasn’t been more central to the election campaign is surprising. Less than 12 months ago, following rising community outrage after the killing of a number of women[6], Prime Minister Anthony Albanese declared violence against women and children a national crisis[7].
Over the past week, the killing of several women in different circumstances, allegedly by men’s violence, has been a reminder[8] of the persistence of this national crisis.
In an election that’s largely focused on cost of living[9], this epidemic of violence should also be front and centre. The scale and impact of this violence is profound – cutting across culture, age, geography and class. It causes immediate and long-term harm and costs the country an estimated $26 billion annually[10].
Why haven’t we heard much?
An obvious explanation might be that violence against women has already been addressed[11] by successive governments – that enough has been done. Others may argue that it’s been overshadowed by more politically “pressing” issues.
Some may even suggest it’s because of a broader political shift[12] away from gender equality commitments, influenced by anti-DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) sentiment that has gained traction internationally[13].
Perhaps a more generous explanation is that the lack of political attention stems from fear of getting the response wrong. The domestic and family violence sector can be fraught with complexity, with different ideas about what should be prioritised.
The national prevention agenda has faced critique[15] in recent months. Scrutiny of whether we are on the right path should always be welcomed, but division is unhelpful.
Complexity should never be an excuse for inaction. Instead, this moment requires political courage and clarity. A declaration of a national crisis is merely rhetoric if it’s not followed by meaningful actions and measurable commitments.
Beyond election cycles
It’s crucial the next federal government delivers a response to domestic violence that’s commensurate with the scale of the problem. This requires a significant increase in investment across the entire ecosystem to boost service availability and accessibility.
This means moving beyond one-off or short-term funding to ensure sustainability across the system, including for crisis response and early intervention initiatives. Consistency of services is needed to disrupt the cycle of intergenerational harm, to understand what works in engaging people who use violence, and to promote long-term recovery.
Read more: What works to prevent violence against women? Here's what the evidence says[16]
There should also be improved collaboration between levels of government. For too long, the siloed approach has impeded progress. The National Partnership Agreement[17] provides a solid foundation for this.
Evidence shows[18] strengthening coordination across agencies and jurisdictions will help identify more women and families at risk of violence. Information-sharing arrangements will also help keep them safer across state and territory boundaries. System failures and blindspots can[19] cost lives.
What else would help?
If elected, Labor has committed[20] to focusing on ending financial abuse and expanding interventions for people who use violence. This means increased funding for perpetrator interventions, including electronic monitoring of high-risk offenders and earlier interventions for young people who use violence.
These intiatives are welcome, but the list of actions needed extends well beyond these commitments.
Fully funding frontline services is a crucial start. This must include services for children and young people[21] experiencing and escaping violence in their own right, and services across rural and remote communities[22]. There’s limited support available in these areas.
Ensuring access to culturally appropriate and trauma-informed services for communities disproportionately affected by violence is also key.
First Nations leaders, practitioners, academics and victim-survivor advocates should be resourced to deliver the dedicated First Nations National Plan and to fully implement the First Nations National Action Plan[23]. This is especially important for First Nations communities, including in the Northern Territory, where calls for increased funding have long been made[24].
The support service workforce, which has a high turnover and burn-out rate[25], must be better supported, including through ongoing professional development and capability training.
In recent weeks, others have called for[26] a national strategy for people who use violence.
Measuring progress is key
Regardless of specific policy commitments, we should be transparently monitoring and evaluating progress on addressing violence. This is the backbone of any effective policy response – without data, we are blind to what works, what doesn’t, and where to focus efforts.
The first national plan was criticised[27] for failing to do this comprehensively. We are at risk[28] of repeating the same mistake.
While this responsibility sits within the functions of the inaugural Commissioner for Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence[29], it has yet to eventuate beyond the information included in the commission’s yearly reports to parliament.
Regardless of who forms government – whether majority or minority – it’s imperative domestic, family and sexual violence remains front and centre in national policymaking. This is not an issue that can wait for the “right time” or for conditions to be more favourable. Women’s and children’s lives depend on it.
The National Sexual Assault, Family and Domestic Violence Counselling Line – 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) – is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week for any Australian who has experienced, or is at risk of, family and domestic violence and/or sexual assault.
References
- ^ commitment to women (alp.org.au)
- ^ The Coalition (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ National Plan To End Violence Against Women and Children (www.dss.gov.au)
- ^ there is much more to do (alp.org.au)
- ^ financial abuse (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ killing of a number of women (womensagenda.com.au)
- ^ national crisis (www.aljazeera.com)
- ^ a reminder (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ cost of living (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ $26 billion annually (www.aihw.gov.au)
- ^ already been addressed (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ broader political shift (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ internationally (theconversation.com)
- ^ Dan Himbrechts/AAP (photos.aap.com.au)
- ^ critique (www.quarterlyessay.com.au)
- ^ What works to prevent violence against women? Here's what the evidence says (theconversation.com)
- ^ National Partnership Agreement (ministers.dss.gov.au)
- ^ Evidence shows (bridges.monash.edu)
- ^ can (bridges.monash.edu)
- ^ has committed (alp.org.au)
- ^ children and young people (www.canberratimes.com.au)
- ^ rural and remote communities (theconversation.com)
- ^ First Nations National Action Plan (www.dss.gov.au)
- ^ have long been made (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ high turnover and burn-out rate (www.crikey.com.au)
- ^ have called for (ntv.org.au)
- ^ was criticised (www.themonthly.com.au)
- ^ at risk (www.crikey.com.au)
- ^ Commissioner for Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence (www.dfsvc.gov.au)
Authors: Kate Fitz-Gibbon, Professor (Practice), Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University
