Ms JODIE HARRISON (Charlestown—Minister for Women, Minister for Seniors, and Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault) (12:49): I contribute to debate on the Crimes Amendment (Breaking and Entering Offences) Bill 2026. This bill builds on the Minns Labor Government's legislative agenda to bolster protections for victim‑survivors of domestic violence. Government members are proud to have passed significant reforms including the toughest bail laws in the country for those charged with domestic and family violence offences, such as electronic monitoring for people bailed on domestic and family violence offences, higher penalties for serious repeat breaches of apprehended domestic violence orders, and the introduction of serious domestic abuse prevention orders to boost our supervision and monitoring of perpetrators.

We are approaching the scourge of domestic and family violence from all angles, whether it be judicial reform, primary prevention, early intervention or crisis response. We are continuing to provide crisis services and wraparound support for women and children who are escaping violence. We are focused on making sure that victim‑survivors have access to appropriate supports, no matter what their postcode is. But we are also doing the important work of early intervention and primary prevention. This work was neglected by the previous Government. Primary prevention is about changing culture and attitudes towards women that tolerate violence. Men have a fundamental role to play in this. It is critical that we include boys and men in our work in primary prevention to support them to develop healthy attitudes towards masculinity and gender equality and recognise their role in building safer communities free from violence. We are taking a whole-of-government, whole‑of‑community approach to addressing domestic and family violence in New South Wales.

The intent of this bill is simple. It is about closing a legal loophole and making it easier to prosecute domestic violence perpetrators without them hiding behind a lease to avoid break and enter charges. In 2023 the High Court considered the case of BA v The King. This case raised important legal questions as to whether break and enter offences are applicable for a person named on a lease, but not occupying the relevant property. In this instance, the appellant BA separated from his partner and moved out of an apartment in Queanbeyan. Although no longer residing at the property, his name remained on the lease. Two months later, BA arrived at the apartment and demanded access. BA then kicked open the front door, causing damage to the lock facilities. He grabbed the victim and shook her, yelled at her, and threw her phone to the floor when she attempted to make a call. BA was charged with the offence of:

… break and enter and commit serious indictable offence (intimidation) in circumstances of aggravation …

BA pleaded not guilty to this charge and was acquitted in the District Court. BA pleaded guilty to lesser charges including "common assault, intimidation and destroy property". The Crown appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeal on a question of law, namely, whether the District Court erred in deciding that, as a precondition to establishing an offence under section 112 (2) of the Crimes Act:

… the prosecution was required to establish that an accused person did not have a pre-existing right to enter the subject dwelling house, notwithstanding that entry was effected by an actual breaking involving force.

The Court of Criminal Appeal unanimously allowed the Crown appeal. The matter was then appealed by BA to the High Court. In a majority judgment, the High Court struck out the break and enter offences and found that a person must commit a trespass to commit a break and enter offence. The victim could not exclude BA from the premises, nor bring an action in trespass against him, because the residential tenancy agreement conferred a right of exclusive possession.

That decision raises significant concerns in the context of domestic and family violence. It is plainly wrong and out of touch with community expectations for a perpetrator to avoid criminal liability for invading a person's home. That is why we have introduced this bill—to overcome such injustice. There have been understandable calls for urgent reform in this space. I understand that; however, the last thing we want to see is unintended consequences from rushed legislative change. That is why the Attorney General has taken the time to get this right. The bill has been informed by the expertise of feedback from stakeholders, including the legal sector; justice agencies; and, importantly, the domestic and family violence sector.

In his second reading speech the Attorney General was actually effusive in his praise for the domestic and family violence sector. I also recognise their critically important contributions, and I thank them for that. Under the provisions in this bill, an offender can be prosecuted for a break and enter offence if they force entry into a victim's residential home and intend to commit violence against the person who lives there. It will not matter if the offender has a technical legal or equitable interest in the property. If it is not their home, break and enter offences will apply. This reflects the minority decision of the High Court, which found that the core purpose of break and enter offences is to protect the peaceful occupation of residential premises from intrusion and criminal conduct by non‑occupants.

To further safeguard victim‑survivors, this bill will ensure that a person is no longer considered an occupant in circumstances where an apprehended violence order [AVO], court order, bail condition or parole prevent them from residing at a property. During consultation, it was made clear that this reform must consider circumstances where a victim‑survivor may be excluded from the home, or voluntarily depart for safety reasons. That is why taking the time to properly consult on this bill was so important. This Government takes very seriously its responsibility to consult with stakeholders who have an interest in our legislation.

This legislation had incredible interest from some of our stakeholders. For example, one feedback was that the legislation should not be designed in a way that would result in break and enter offences being applied to victim‑survivors who are returning to collect their possessions. That is why, under this bill, all break and enter offences will require another offence to either be intended or committed. This Government does not want to see victim‑survivors penalised as a result of this bill. That is why we took the time to consult. We make no bones about that. We make no apologies for it.

The second offence must be a serious indictable offence, being one that carries a maximum penalty of at least five years imprisonment. That second offence also must be committed against, or intended to be committed against, a current or former intimate partner. To ensure that this bill works as intended, we are providing time for justice agencies to make system changes and develop training and education before it comes into effect. There will also be a requirement for a statutory review two years after commencement. In essence, this bill is about closing legal loopholes for domestic violence offenders and ensuring that our legal framework is in fact in line with community expectations. The bill provides a strong and appropriate response to the issues arising from BA v The King. As the minority decision of this case noted:

Nothing seems more apt to risk serious disturbances of social peace and good order and to engender potential violence against people in their own homes than concluding that, in kicking the door down to enter, and then assaulting his former partner …, the appellant committed no crime.

A lot of work has been invested in getting this bill right. I reiterate my appreciation of the work of the Attorney General, experts, practitioners and people with lived experience for their input into this important work. The builds on the record of this Government in the domestic and family violence space. [Extension of time]

This Government was the first to implement a dedicated primary prevention strategy, working to embed a culture of respect and zero tolerance for violence. We want to stop the violence before it starts. We have achieved significant milestones including the expansion of Staying Home Leaving Violence to every local government area across New South Wales, when in the past there were vast swathes of New South Wales where people had no access to that incredibly important support program. Since coming to government, the total domestic and family violence program budget has been over 50 per cent higher than those prior to the Minns Labor Government being elected. We have increased investment in domestic and family violence in every budget.