I don't know if I'll have a chance to answer both, but definitely in relation to your second question, consent in law is sort of the turning point or what helps us distinguish. If someone is consenting—if they're not coerced, if they're not forced physically, if they're not drugged, if they're not sort of “dragged into it”—but of their own consent choosing to do something, that seems to be a big distinguishing factor. There is tons of case law on that. Consent case law is also in relation to sexual assault, and there are more definitions around what consent means that way.
If I'm a consenting adult, engaging in an activity of my own volition, then I'm consenting, right? I'm not being forced into it, so I'm not being trafficked.
For the first part of the question, I don't think I can give you the full answer in the time you have, but definitely there would need to be some amendments to the Criminal Code. I would suggest that it's not PCEPA. I'd suggest that you have to look at PCEPA as not being effective, as not clear enough, and as causing or creating pre-Bedford circumstances resulting in the loss of life, death. From an indigenous person's perspective, during the national inquiry, another 157 indigenous women went missing or were murdered in unresolved cases, so the violence against indigenous women is not decreasing.