Wednesday, 11 May 2022

Bills

Victims of Crime (Financial Assistance Scheme) Bill 2022

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Ms HUTCHINS:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Mr BATTIN (Gembrook) (15:37): I rise to speak on behalf of the opposition and lead the debate on the Victims of Crime (Financial Assistance Scheme) Bill 2022. At the outset I will say that the opposition will not oppose the bill. The purpose for which this bill was brought into this place was in response to the 2018 Victorian Law Reform Commission report on its review of the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal and its governing legislation, the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996. The VLRC made 100 recommendations, including the creation of a new administrative scheme to replace VOCAT to assist victims in their recovery from acts of violence. The bill provides for a new administrative scheme to deliver financial assistance for victims of crime in Victoria. Whilst the main provision is to provide a new scheme to assist victims of crime in their recovery from acts of violence, the bill will also amend the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 in relation to the scheme in that act and amend the Victims of Crime Commissioner Act 2015 in relation to victims of crime, the functions of the commissioner and the reporting requirements under that act. It will also make consequential amendments.

We have gone through and reviewed the bill, consulted with the government and had discussions around it. Whilst as a whole we support the bill, there are some minor areas where we have requested some further follow-up, and I will go through some of those specific clauses as we go through. First and foremost, when we are debating a bill around victims of crime here in Victoria I think everyone in this house agrees that anything to do with victims of crime is challenging, whether you are in this place and obviously with victims out there, and also most of us in this place would have had a victim of crime at some stage come to our office and discuss different things. Whether it is financial, whether it is issues they are still having at home or extra support, that is one of the roles in this place that we should say—and I assume every person when they leave this place should be able to say—that at some stage we have assisted a victim here in Victoria and worked with them for the best outcome for that person.

Having the portfolio that I do with victim support in the opposition and also in the previous opposition in the previous four years, I worked closely with Ed O’Donohue and we met with many victims around Victoria and discussed some of the challenges that they have faced. Particularly between 2014 and 2018 there were many that came to us with challenges that they faced in the court system, whether it was infrastructure in the court system, places they could go or how they were dealt with through the system. It was not that we talked about just the victim as the person who was assaulted but we also talked about the families who are victims. We spoke about others who are involved in the court process as well and some of the issues that confronted them. Whilst this bill is not directly going to be adjusting what is happening within the infrastructure within the court system, I think it is really important that we do put on record that those victims that have come forward and spoken about some of those issues to us and the government in a very respectful way need to be heard more, and we need to be working with them more on ways we can deal with victims through our courts system.

Seeing or hearing of cases like that of one young lady whose father was murdered and who when she went to the bathroom found the offender’s girlfriend sharing the same bathroom and the pressure that puts back on families, these are the things that all need to be considered when we are talking about victims here in Victoria. Again, it is something that every person in this house would have dealt with at some stage in this role. I note the member for Bayswater is here as well, and obviously as a former police officer he would have dealt with many victims. It is a challenge when you go out to many jobs where you are dealing with victims. I think it is a challenge mentally and physically, having to deal with people who have lost things, and victim circumstances, we all know, can range from violence all the way through to having a gnome stolen at home. Their circumstances at that time are very, very important.

But the bill here today aims to recognise victims of crime and the impact of violence on those victims by providing a respectful forum for those victims to come forward so they can be heard and their experiences can be properly acknowledged by the state, to assist the victims in their recovery from acts of violence by providing financial assistance and to complement other services provided to victims by the state. And there are services currently available. Whilst some will say these services need to be expanded, we need more of those services. Many services are available, and a lot of victims are not aware of it. I think it is just a communication issue sometimes with getting that information to them about what is available. The bill also aims to enable victims to receive financial assistance under the new act, noting that such assistance is not intended to reflect the level of compensation that may be available to the victims via a common law or other process.

Just quickly I will go through some of the areas of concern. In clause 31 there are grounds where an application for assistance can be refused. We have concern because there is no definition of what constitutes ‘reasonable time’ in the context of when the violent incident on which the claim lies was reported to the Victoria Police, and I think it is important that that definition is put in there, so we do know what reasonable time is. It is great to say ‘reasonable time’, but it should either be a set time frame or no time frame. You cannot have the words ‘reasonable time’ where it is up to someone to decide that later on, because reasonable time for me as a person who is not a victim compared to reasonable time for someone who is a victim can be vastly different, and we have seen that in the reporting of sexual abuse, sexual assault and historical sexual assault cases. What is reasonable time to report an incident that is violent or of a sexual nature for a victim can be a lot different to what it is for someone who is just hearing about that rather than the actual victim themselves. So we would like the government to go back and have a look at that, and we will be raising this in the upper house when the bill goes through to the Council and asking the government. Obviously they will be prepared. They will get the notes of what we are talking about today so they can actually have some answers on how they are going to define this in the future to give confidence back to victims that, when they are heard at a time they want to be heard, that time is within the realm of what would be classed as reasonable time, but we want them to get a definition of that.

Clause 41—victim recognition meetings—entitles victims who have been granted an application for assistance to request the scheme decision-maker to meet with the victim on behalf of the state:

… to acknowledge the effects of the act of violence on the victim and express the State’s condolences.

Subclause (2) provides that the scheme decision-maker, upon receipt of a request, may hold a victim recognition meeting after a decision has been made to pay assistance under this bill. When we were in the bill briefing, we asked specifically about this clause, and we were given the factors to be considered when deciding if a meeting would be held. The agency stated that the guidelines would be developed to allow consistency in decision-making. When we asked further, the agency stated the victim representatives would be involved in this process and consulted. Now, we just need the government to come out and confirm that when we are talking about ‘may hold’, again, the victim’s voice is the most important thing when we are going through the victims bill here or the victims of crime act.

We need to make sure it is confirmed in the second reading and obviously going through the Council that the victim will have the opportunity to have a say in that and will be consulted in that process and not after, or that a decision will not be made before the victim gets a say. Going to consult with a victim after a decision has been made is a waste of time. It has got to be consultation before a decision is made. We just need the government to go on record to say exactly how that is going to operate to ensure that victims are heard.

Clause 42 is the recovery of compensation. Subclause (1) allows a person to whom, or for whose benefit, assistance is paid, on or after being notified of the decision to pay the assistance, to assign to the state their right to recover from any other person by civil proceedings, damages or compensation in respect of the injury or death to which the assistance relates. This subclause empowers the state in certain circumstances to pursue offender recovery of amounts of assistance to improve sustainability of the scheme. We just want to, again, make sure—we have asked the question and we have not had answers on it, so it will be asked in the Council: is this capped? Is there going to be a capped process on this, on the funds that are available, or what payments can be made to someone in respect to the damages of death or injury? Does it mean the agency could consider the scheme to be too costly and therefore close it? So if you bring in this scheme and it appears it is going to become too costly, will this give an opportunity for the government of the day or the agency to actually stop that process? I think it is really important and it needs to be on the record that that cannot happen, that this legislation is put into place not just as a bill to send out a media release but so that in the future it is protecting the rights of those victims who are going through that process within the court. It is really important that we do have that.

We already know victims here in Victoria have enough red tape to go through with the court system, whether that is as a witness or whether that is going before the courts. There is stress, there is strain. There is a lot of red tape they have to go through already, and particularly when they are trying to prove a mental health injury rather than a physical injury—the challenges that are faced by a victim to highlight and confirm that this is actually part of the injury they have suffered or the pain they have suffered and what can and cannot be relieved for that pain. I think it is really important that if we are going to be looking at legislation to protect that, it has to be very, very clear. It has to be written out in black and white to ensure that the victim’s voice is heard, the compensation and time frame is correct, it will not be folded or moved away because it has become too costly and for anything where there is pain or suffering the red tape can be reduced and the pressures on any of those victims going forward.

These are important reforms, and we have said that before. There is a default commencement of 1 December 2024 for any provision of the bill that has not come into operation before that date. The bill contains a delayed default commencement due to the significant work that first must be undertaken to establish the scheme following the passage of the bill, including, we understand, recruiting and appointing the scheme decision-maker and staff, building information technology systems to fulfil the requirements of the scheme and developing the published guidelines. The bill has come here today to obviously start off that process, and as I said, we are happy to ensure that—we are not opposing this—it goes through. We want to make sure, though, that this is not just a commitment that stands there and is not delivered by the next election—the one coming after. We just want to make sure that it is in place, that everything can be done, that there are not six years between when it was promised and when it finally gets delivered and that it does not end up being delivered just prior to the next election. We want to make sure that it is not just, as I said, a media release.

Probably one of the greatest pressures on victims at the moment here in Victoria, which will not be considered in parts of this bill, is the restriction of the fact that our courts are so backlogged. ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ is a saying we have heard for many, many years, and there is truth in that, but we need to make sure that one thing we can fix here in our court system or our system for victims is the process of effectively becoming a victim to following it up, having a court case heard and finalised and everybody being aware of what is happening with that. That is where the greatest amount of pressure comes for victims. It is the waiting time. At the moment our courts are delayed. We have got a wait of up to two years in some cases with court cases being delayed here in Victoria, which means a victim is waiting for those two years, which is unfair on them and unfair on their family. It makes it difficult to get on with life with some of these violent offences when they have got this hanging over their head in a waiting game of what is going to happen.

So we will be calling on the government whilst they are going through this consultation to also not lose focus on one of the biggest things you can do to make life better for victims here in this state, and that is ensuring that we can get the process of the court systems back in place, that we can make sure the process of moving through our court system for victims is as quick and fast as possible with the best support possible.

One of the delays in going through the courts at the moment that is obviously part and parcel is because of the paperwork that it takes, I know, for Victoria Police to process when they have to bring someone before the courts. If you are going to look at the victims, you have to look at the entire court process, and that includes from the very start. I was speaking to the Police Association Victoria recently, who said their job is 5 per cent out on the road and 95 per cent paperwork these days with the process of bringing an offender into court now; with the amount of paperwork that is required in the law enforcement assistance program system, the storage system and the data system from the police; with the court data required to take someone to court with charge sheets and summaries et cetera; and with taking them in for the mention, going through a contest mention and having to provide more paperwork, more statements, every time.

Every step of the way with these a victim needs to be the centre of attention on how we are doing it to ensure they are kept in contact, how we can get that through faster and in a more efficient way and how we can also use Victoria Police at the time to ensure that they are passing on the contacts to victims so they understand they have got extra support. And what happens to them once the offence is proven in court? What happens to the victims? We do not just walk away from them. How do they become aware of what is available for them—for victims of crime—in financial support or for mental health or physical support for them later on down the track? I think that is probably the one area where, when the discussions around implementing this program are all put into play and all put into place to ensure the victims are protected for compensation, all of that must be taken in, because it is a whole realm of processes to ensure that our victims are protected here in Victoria.

On the bill itself, as I said, many, many parts of it we do support because we do think that victims need to be heard. Many parts of it we do support because we think compensation should be available. And I have a very quick example. A senior sergeant who I used to work with, who was effectively beaten up fairly seriously, went through the court under the old victims of crime financial assistance process. When he tried to get financial assistance he was told, ‘Sorry, it’s just too bad; it’s part of your job’. Now, Victoria Police are not punching bags. I have not gone through this in detail to see who it does protect with that, but I think it is really important that every person, no matter who they are, is treated as a victim as it goes through.

But overall, as I said, the bill itself will deliver on the report from the Victorian Law Reform Commission on the Victorian financial assistance scheme. We support most of it. There are some parts that we will definitely raise in questions through the upper house, to ensure that we can get those answers and to ensure that victims are heard, that victims do not have to worry about a time line that nobody is aware of and that at the end of the day victims are consulted through this whole process.

Mr McGUIRE (Broadmeadows) (15:53): Victims of crime can suffer deep and lifelong trauma. This bill is a once-in-a-half-century opportunity to provide victims with a better pathway to recovery. Victims have waited too long to get the help that they need. That is why the Victorian government is introducing landmark reforms to better support victims of crime by creating the financial assistance scheme being enshrined into law, and that is the absolute value of this piece of legislation. I want to commend off the top the Minister for Crime Prevention and everybody involved with this legislation, and I also want to make sure that people understand that the Andrews Labor government is providing more support than ever before for the victim support system through nearly $100 million over the 2021–22 and 2022–23 budgets. The new financial assistance scheme for victims of crime is a highly anticipated reform because of the fundamental difference it will make to victims’ lives.

I want to go to the proposition of the development of this bill and the sophistication that it brings, because the bill will deliver a trauma-informed and safe administrative scheme that is supported by guiding principles. These principles are crucial in upholding the dignity and wellbeing of victims and ensuring their voices are prioritised. I just want to say, in response to the opposition, that it is a priority of the government in designing this legislation, this new financial assistance scheme, that the voices of victims are at the centre, and that is how it has been developed. I know that was a key point that the opposition raised, I think in good faith, to try and establish that, so I just want to respond to that directly so everybody knows and understands where this is coming from and its significance.

The bill implements, or partly implements, 84 of the 100 recommendations from the Victorian Law Reform Commission’s report on the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal. Significantly the Royal Commission into Family Violence also received several submissions that detailed the traumatic experiences of family violence victim-survivors at VOCAT. This is the context of how this legislation has evolved. The bill will provide a forum for the state of Victoria to acknowledge and recognise the harm victims have experienced to better support their safety and recovery.

This bill enhances the accessibility of financial assistance for victims of crime by better recognising LGBTIQ+ chosen families, Aboriginal kinship families, children who are exposed to violence and victims of image-based sexual offences. Upholding and protecting the rights of victims of crime is a significant responsibility, and this bill ensures victims can access services and support and tell their stories with their rights and privacies protected. That is why I am saying it is a nuanced, sophisticated way to try and put the victims’ voices at the centre but also to address these concerns.

Financial assistance can be provided to victims of violent crimes in Victoria for expenses including medical expenses, loss of earnings, counselling and funeral expenses. During the bill’s development $54 million was invested in the 2020–21 budget for this scheme, and another investment of about $40 million is coming in the 2022–23 budget. This is the largest investment in victim support of any government in decades, so that is the critical point. Here is a way of addressing the trauma. Here is a better way to recovery. Here is a way that hears the victim’s voice, gives it primacy and also then backs it up with the financial commitment to help people as well.

Following the passage of the bill the scheme’s operations will continue to be designed with victim-survivors, their advocates and the organisations that work with them. The financial assistance scheme will be in operation in the second half of 2023. Importantly, the bill recognises the scheme will need to continue to improve and grow with the changing needs of victims and will therefore implement an independent review after two years of operation.

I just wanted to define the architecture, the strategy and the concern that the government has in addressing these issues in the best possible way and ameliorating the harm as best it can to help people to recover. These traumas, as I say, can shadow people right through their lives, so how this is handled is of great significance. Key interim measures have included the passing of amendments to the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 to create a new class of scheme staff and tribunal officers and investing almost $10 million in their recruitment to clear what is defined as an unacceptable backlog to make sure that we help these people sooner.

Business interrupted under sessional orders.