Foxy, can I be so bold as to suggest the majority of people we are dealing with here have no respect for anyone, let alone the law. However, until we actually get some real stats on the problem, how on earth can we be expected to tackle the problem, and more importantly, why throw money into fixing something if you don't know where it broken.

As an example, if there are a large number of ethnics involved, who by their very upbringing disrespect women, what hope do we have of changing that. Would a better approach not be to deport anyone who is a serial offender, such as the with the case of Man Manis, who quite obviously had no respect for women.

Of cause my belief is we should never have allowed these types in, but that's history.

Now if a large number are also indigenous, then we have our hands tied behind our backs, simply because if we do intervene, we cause another so called stolen generation.

My beef is we have this domestic violence, single mums with multiple kids to multiple fathers, among other issues, all of which waste billions of our tax dollars and such waste is the reason our retired folk live in poverty.

Sorry, but I'm over funding this and it's not about money, it's about people contributing to society, not living off it.

Rehctub "Of cause my belief is we should never have allowed these types in, but that's history." The word you were looking for here is 'course', not 'cause', Rehctub....they don't mean the same thing at all.....just trying to be helpful.

If what you are suggesting is that we shouldn't allow criminals to migrate to Australia, I think that rule is already in place.
The suggestion by our PM is that we work harder to find the reasons for, and the best protections against, domestic violence in Australian society. As we are a multicultural society, naturally these measures will involve people from all different cultures and races.

I am hoping that the people who hurt or kill their family members will be stopped and punished severely, irrespective of where they or their ancestors originally came from.
I don't really care about their origins at all

I want to commend all the posters on OLO.
Between everyone that posts we usually cover just about every aspect of a particular issue, and although we may disagree often, the disagreement often provides further opportunity to fine-tune a better point of view.

So the governments going to throw 100 million at the problem?

Will that money be an investment or money thrown down the drain?
What sort of bang for our buck will we get?
What will be the outcome?
Harsher Punishment and Better Education or both?
How many millions will they spend coming to that likely conclusion?
Both of which are going to result in further expense.

We need them to get this right, otherwise whats the point?
It'll be throwing more good money after bad.

If they dont cover every single issue brought up on this thread topic its reasonable to assume that the money wasn't well spent because I think we here at OLO could do a better job ourselves if we simply moved from arguing the merits of a particular issue to organising ourselves into finding the right solution of a particular issue.

Armchair Critic,

"So the governments going to throw 100 million at the problem?"

"Will that money be an investment or money thrown down the drain?
What sort of bang for our buck will we get?"

"How many millions will they spend coming to that likely conclusion?
Both of which are going to result in further expense."

"It'll be throwing more good money after bad."

It should be pointed out that this money is merely being poured back in to this area - after it was removed under the Abbott regime.

It's a bit like the refugee quota - the Abbott govt cut our annual intake by one third - and then makes a "seemingly" generous gesture by upping the Syrian intake...which really takes us back to where we were before the intake was cut.

I think it's fair to say that the fella who bopped the woman at the footy the other night is a case in point...probably loaded with "alcohol", acting offensively around other patrons including children, he was asked to sit down and be quiet. His response was to punch the woman (whom he did not know personally) in the throat.

That's an automatic, almost instinctive, response - no civilised control

Armchair critic, if this Government spent this money on locking up these men at the first physically violent offense against his loved ones,
and giving them anger management education etc while in jail,
and beefing up security at the homes of his loved ones before he gets out of jail,
and puts tracking devices on the men's leg when they get out of jail,
Then maybe some lives will be saved.
And that is certainly worth the money.

This Government was quite happy to throw millions of dollars at Nauru and at the asylum seeker merry-go-round to 'stop the boats' to prevent them from drowning at sea.
Surely it can spend money on strategies for the safety of it's own citizens?

Armchair Critic,

You raised the crucial matter of measurable outcomes, which all government programs are supposed to have, along with the original goals and strategies that should be based on evidence.

I am pleased to respond because most of my contributions to the forum are about that. My theme is almost always governments getting value for the money they have extracted from taxpayers. No government has its own money. It is all taken from someone and it is limited.

That is also where I depart company with some of the posters here, who believe that the bucket is inexhaustible and that there is always someone apart form themselves who should be paying the tab.

Back to the point, no, there are no robust and effective measures of outcomes that are based on numbers and reported to the Parliament and public. That is after scores of years since Whitlam, who was responsible for many of the leaks in the bucket of public revenue.

The $$ goes to the fleas on fleas on fleas. Same as indigenous funding where despite the $millions allocated to (say) housing every year there is SFA to show for it and the costs per unit just keep escalating.

There always were laws against harming another person, whether domestically associated or otherwise. However the courts must demonstrate to offenders that their careers in violence must stop or they will be gaoled.
tbc..