Footprints childcare abuse case: Sydney families fight for government recognition after 15-year legal battle | SMH

The 15-year fight to bring an accused childcare paedophile to justice has left Sydney parents Jacqui* and Rachel* bankrupt, their children retraumatised and the families distrustful of the judicial system.

The childcare centre hired its own investigator and child protection teams closed the reports, while criminal charges were dropped at the eleventh hour. Later, a successful civil lawsuit was overturned on appeal, leaving the women and their children still fighting for justice.

Now, with the support of Greens MP Sue Higginson, they’re seeking government recognition for systemic failures, as well as ex gratia payments from the government, which are made in special circumstances.

Jacqui and Rachel’s daughters Julia* and Rose* were allegedly sexually assaulted at Footprints childcare centre in Sydney’s south by volunteer Rodney Raymond Bird, who co-owned the facility with his daughter, who was the director. The centre has since been sold, and the families cannot be identified for legal reasons.

In 2015, the families lodged a civil claim, suing the centre for negligence and vicarious liability. They were awarded a total of $2 million in damages in 2020, with the court finding, on the balance of probabilities, the two girls were abused by Bird.

However, two years later, that ruling was overturned on appeal; Rachel was forced back into mediation, while Jacqui was advised to seek another trial and ordered to pay the centre’s legal costs.

“The perpetrator’s legal firm sent us a bill for almost a million dollars,” Jacqui said.

“How do you explain to your teenage daughter that she might lose her home to the man who sexually assaulted her?”

In yet another blow, the families learnt this year from questions lodged in parliament by Higginson that Bird’s electronic devices were never seized or investigated, video from the childcare centre was never obtained and that the only evidence police had relied upon was the children’s testimony.

Police declined to reopen the investigation due to the lack of new evidence, the passage of time and Bird’s death.

The mothers have never stopped fighting for change. They gave extensive evidence to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, which led to legislative reform.

On Wednesday, Higginson is expected to introduce a notice of motion calling on the government to acknowledge the failings of the institutions and systems that let them down; recognise the damage of denying justice to the children; and provide the families with ex gratia payments.

Source: Footprints childcare abuse case: Sydney families fight for government recognition after 15-year legal battle

Non-disclosure agreements to be waived for landmark military sexual violence inquiry – ABC News

In short:

Sexual violence survivors who served in the military and are bound by non-disclosure agreements will be able to give evidence at a landmark inquiry.

There had been calls for the government to ensure people bound by NDAs were able to share their stories.

The NDAs will only be waived for the purposes of the inquiry.

Source: Non-disclosure agreements to be waived for landmark military sexual violence inquiry – ABC News

Abolishing stamp duty for victims of domestic, family and sexual violence | Premier of South Australia

Victims of domestic, family and sexual violence will be eligible for 100 per cent stamp duty relief and the First Home Owner Grant, even if they had purchased a home previously, under a new ex gratia scheme designed to help vulnerable women leave dangerous situations and re-establish themselves in secure, independent housing.

Source: Abolishing stamp duty for victims of domestic, family and sexual violence | Premier of South Australia

Police misconduct exposed: What the force didn’t want you to see | Four Corners – YouTube

Women reveal Byron Bay’s predatory 2000s culture of rape, humiliation and shame – ABC News

Rachel Kila has waived her right to anonymity to join dozens of others speaking out about the experiences of young girls in Byron Bay in the early 2000s, when they say it became normalised for older boys and men to groom and have sex with girls, then publicly humiliate them.

Fifteen women have alleged to the ABC they were raped or sexually assaulted by older boys or adult men when they were as young as 12, and seven said they were in “relationships” with older boys or adult men in their early teens.

Some of the women described being sprayed with urine, faeces and semen, and being spied on during sex, part of a culture of public degradation they said was pervasive in the popular tourist resort town.

At least three women said they left school early because of their experiences and many described issues with relationships, intimacy and drugs and alcohol because of the men’s behaviour.

“It was like Puberty Blues on steroids,” one woman said.

Source: Women reveal Byron Bay’s predatory 2000s culture of rape, humiliation and shame – ABC News

Rebel Girls Uplifting Stories About Courageous Young Women — Spinifex Press

Rebel Girls is a powerful international collection of stories and essays about teenage girls confronting sexism, bullying, body image pressures, autism, ADHD and discrimination.

Fifty contributors from various countries including The Netherlands, USA, Taiwan, Denmark, China, Afghanistan and Spain pose important questions that you don’t often hear discussed about what it means to be a girl in the modern world. We hear from experts such as Finnish psychiatrist Riittakerttu Kaltiala and Holly Moreau from Fanfiction USA who share their work with girls and dissect the cultural forces at play. There are also the stories from girls and women themselves who explain how they are navigating the complex challenges faced by girls in the 21st century.

The future for girls is crucial for the future of everyone. This uplifting collection demonstrates how the next generation is continuing the radical feminist fight to expose misogyny and find autonomy, confidence, enjoyment and independence in their lives.

Source: Rebel Girls Uplifting Stories About Courageous Young Women — Spinifex Press

Mothers accused of abducting their children under archaic international law | 60 Minutes Australia – YouTube

Two senior NSW ministers suspended from upper house over failure to release documents – ABC News

MLCs voted to suspend the government’s leader in the Legislative Council, Penny Sharpe, and her deputy John Graham, to protest the Labor’s failure to produce certain papers for scrutiny.

Ms Sharpe was kicked out of the house on Tuesday for two weeks because the government would not release a statement Premier Chris Minns gave to police over a historical sexual assault allegation against a Labor official.

On Thursday, Mr Graham was suspended over the government’s failure to release a report by former judge John Sackar on hate speech legislation.

Liberal MLC Susan Carter said the term “cabinet document” was being used like “Harry Potter’s cloak of invisibility”.

“We can throw it over everything and therefore the public, the parliament never get to see these documents,” Ms Carter told 702 ABC Sydney.

Centre for Public Integrity chair and former Supreme Court judge Anthony Whealy KC said cabinet confidentiality was a “grey area”, but he doubted it applied to the report on hate speech laws.

His and Ms Sharpe’s removal means Labor now has the same number of votes as the Coalition in the upper house.

The government said 24 bills are backed up in the house of review.

Source: Two senior NSW ministers suspended from upper house over failure to release documents – ABC News

Impact of Queensland’s coercive control laws not yet clear one year after implementation – ABC News

The state’s coercive control laws came into effect in May last year and are designed to ensure victims can report a pattern of behaviour described as controlling and manipulative in current and former intimate partner relationships. This includes financial abuse, tracking, monitoring and humiliation.

Coercive control is not retrospectively applied in Queensland, so only applies to behaviour presented after May 26, 2025.

One of the major challenges with the legislation is proving a persistent pattern of abuse.

CEO of Women’s Legal Service Queensland Nadia Bromley said despite hurdles, victim-survivors should not be deterred from reaching out’ for support.

“Coercive control is harder to prove than other charges because it is about a course of conduct and the legislation, which only came into effect in May, can only be applied to behaviour that happened after that time,” Ms Bromley said.

“Unfortunately, we know that there are women who have been living with decades of abuse.

The Queensland Police Union said while they are supportive of the coercive control legislation, there have not been extra resources invested to assist the service with executing the laws.

Domestic violence frontline services say there have been positive outcomes since the legislation was introduced, as well as some unintended negative consequences.

CEO of the Domestic Violence Action Centre (DVAC) Amie Carrington said there had been a growing number of people reaching out to their service who were later assessed to have been the perpetrator rather than the victim.

Source: Impact of Queensland’s coercive control laws not yet clear one year after implementation – ABC News

What is the Sex Discrimination Act and how does it protect people? – Law Society Journal

The controversy concerns the meaning of “sex” in the act and its interaction with gender identity discrimination. The Coalition wants to amend the act to include a definition of biological sex, arguing “the law does not properly protect single sex spaces for women and girls”.

But what’s missing from the conversation is how the Sex Discrimination Act works and what it was designed to achieve.

What is the Sex Discrimination Act?

The Sex Discrimination Act is a federal law. It originally became law in 1984 and protected people from sex, pregnancy and marital status discrimination.

Currently, the act protects people from discrimination based on a wider range of attributes, called “protected attributes”. These include their sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, marital or relationship status, pregnancy or potential pregnancy status, breastfeeding or family responsibilities.

What are the exceptions?

The act contains many exceptions allowing conduct that would otherwise be discriminatory. For example, there are general exceptions for services where they can only be provided to members of one sex.

Exceptions also apply to staff and students in religious educational institutions.

There are exceptions for participation in sports where strength, stamina or physique is relevant.

It is also not discrimination to provide affirmative action or equal opportunity measures. But these exceptions, called “special measures”, cannot discriminate on the basis of other protected attributes.

Very few court tests

The recent decision of Giggle For Girls v Tickle was the first case of gender identity discrimination heard by the Federal Court. The full bench found a transgender woman had been directly discriminated against on the basis of gender by being refused access to a women-only social media app.

[T]he High Court has not heard a sex discrimination claim in 20 years.

It has never considered the act and its prohibitions on discrimination. This means there is little higher court authority on how its provisions operate.

The 2013 changes

In 2013, the federal Sex Discrimination Act was amended to include the attributes of gender identity, sexual orientation, intersex status and relationship status.

The definitions of “man” and “woman” were also removed and are instead understood by their “normal meaning”. This means the words aren’t narrowly interpreted to exclude transgender people.

In 2013, the amendments made to the Sex Discrimination Act were not particularly controversial. As then-Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus noted in respect of a Senate Committee Report on human rights and discrimination legislation: “all parties agree on one issue – the pressing need for protection from discrimination for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community at the federal level.”

[Ed: And indeed the Liberal Party led by Tony Abbott in the lower house supported the 2013 amendment and when in power made no move to repeal it. The Liberal Party has also persecuted its own members who spoke out against it, including Kath Deves and Moira Deeming.]

Source: What is the Sex Discrimination Act and how does it protect people? – Law Society Journal