Mr CHRIS HARTCHER (Terrigal) [1.11 p.m.]: Today I bring to the attention of the House a situation in my electorate where the interference of this Government's Department of Community Services [DOCS] has caused a very successful advocacy program to dissolve its association with and assistance to victims of domestic violence. DOCS has caused Central Coast Domestic Violence Court Assistance Scheme Incorporated to hand back the auspice of providing the domestic violence intervention response team, which supports the most common victims of domestic violence: women.

The domestic violence intervention response team's aim was to help local women and children navigate their way through the court process and provide a safe room for these victims when at court, so they did not have to confront their abuser.

Originally asked in 2003 by the Department of Premier and Cabinet under the Community Solutions Program to auspice a service for women and children at Gosford and Woy Woy Local Courts, the domestic violence intervention response team scheme has operated with such success that funding had increased over time to employ additional staff. The program was so successful that it even won police awards for its innovative service. The team was in partnership with the Brisbane Water Police Local Area Command, responding to and assisting local women and children in domestic violence situations. A recent program evaluation by NEXUS recommended very few changes to the team. Based on this, Central Coast Court Assistance Scheme Incorporated agreed to continue to manage the team's services until 2012.

Central Coast Domestic Violence Assistance Scheme Incorporated has only deducted a minimal auspice fee from the team and in some cases has carried the operating costs. Now DOCS has, without any consultation, insisted upon unrealistic changes to the program that would be impossible to achieve within the allocated funding. DOCS insisted that the specialised women's service change to accommodate men, which is in breach of a service agreement with Legal Aid New South Wales, which provides core funding. It also conflicts with the team's constitution, which was to work with women and children only. Men were not neglected by the domestic violence response team; they were referred to other agencies already set up with trained workers to deal with male victims.

Although I recognise, as does everyone, that men can be victims of domestic violence, it is traditionally and overwhelmingly women and children who are most at risk and in need of support. The response team is not trained to deal with male victims and is concerned that dealing with them could do more harm than good. Men experience domestic violence very differently to women and these differences need to be taken into account in the development and delivery of services. Having men and women managed together is to diminish the support of either. To accommodate men in the safe room would mean that when attending court, women and children would await their turn to face their abuser in the same allegedly safe room as men. This is not acceptable.

Emotions and fears linked to domestic violence are unique. This is someone the victim loved, trusted and shared her life with. This same person is now terrorising and frightening her. Often the situation is complicated because of all the factors involved—love, violence, shared assets, often children and even pets. The brave woman who decides to leave a violent or potentially violent situation now has to navigate an unfriendly legal system whilst dealing with relationship issues. She may now not even live at home anymore. What will happen to this woman's resolve and strength when the safe room in which she is expecting to be free is now accommodating men? To her, he could be her aggressor's brother, friend, workmate or just look like him. His mere presence can be unsettling. Left with another man, even if he is a victim himself, would not be very helpful.

I have been informed that the domestic violence intervention response team program has now been placed under the auspices of Brisbane Water Police. There was no community consultation by DOCS. None of the local community groups that showed an interest in the program was consulted. Gosford Family Support Services were interested in picking up the program but were never approached by DOCS. There is enough evidence to know that victims of domestic violence are far more comfortable disclosing information to community advocacy groups rather than to an investigative body such as the police. This local service for women and children should be allowed to run in the most efficient way without constant meddling. The local service was more than happy to assist until 2012 but cannot continue to work under the onerous conditions imposed by DOCS.

Again, this Government is abandoning those who need them most—women and children who are the victims of domestic violence. Why is the Department of Premier and Cabinet not taking responsibility under the Community Solutions Program as originally intended? Why is the Premier allowing those most in need of the service to go without? I call upon the Premier to intervene in this situation and continue the auspices and funding of this excellent program that looks after women and children in need. Men who are in need should be sponsored by another program.