Wednesday, 15 November 2023

Matters of public importance

Community safety

The SPEAKER (16:01): I have accepted a statement from the member for Malvern proposing the following matter of public importance for discussion:

That this house reaffirms that no Victorian should face harassment on account of their faith, and therefore:

(1) condemns the intimidatory protest held in close proximity to a Caulfield synagogue on 10 November 2023; and

(2) supports the reinstatement of Victoria Police’s full range of move-on and arrest powers.

Michael O’BRIEN (Malvern) (16:01): Normally I would say it is a great pleasure to rise to speak on a matter of public importance debate in this chamber, but given the topic I do not think such words would be appropriate. It is in fact a matter of great concern as a Victorian that we are discussing people being attacked because of their faith in this city and in this state, because let us be under no doubt: that is exactly what has happened, and it is wrong – it is absolutely wrong – and we need to call out with one voice as a Parliament that it is wrong. We are starting to see the sorts of antisemitism, the sorts of attacks on people because of their faith that have never been my experience of this city or this state or I suspect that of many other members either.

To see the front page of the Herald Sun newspaper on Saturday morning with the headline ‘Synagogue evacuated, fight erupts in Caulfield: Jewish under attack’ – that is gutting. It is gutting for me as a non-Jewish person. I can only imagine what people of the Jewish faith are feeling. I know I have spoken to Jewish people in my community of Malvern, and they are worried. They are scared. They are nervous about being who they are and professing their own faith, and that is not what Victoria should be about. To have Jewish students being warned not to wear their uniforms to and from school lest they be targets for attack – that is not who we are as a state, but sadly it seems that is what we have become. We need to end it, and we need to end it now.

To go to the events of Friday night, again rather than paraphrasing, it is probably easier for me just to read from two of the newspapers of record in this state, the Herald Sun and the Age. Again quoting from the Herald Sun:

Police have been forced to pepper-spray pro-Palestinian protesters outside a synagogue in Caulfield as clashes erupted between Jewish and Muslim groups, with Melbourne’s Jewish community on high alert last night.

The article goes on:

Pro-Palestinian protesters were pepper-sprayed in a clash with police outside a Caulfield synagogue on Friday night – just hours after a Muslim-owned burger store was set alight.

The violence erupted in Princes Park an hour after the Central synagogue on Maple St was evacuated as hundreds of pro-Palestinian protesters stormed from the park across the road.

Footage obtained by the Herald Sun shows protesters clashing with police as they streamed on to Hawthorn Rd following what had started as a mostly peaceful protest.

To that I would say: don’t they usually start as mostly peaceful? The trouble is that we know that tensions rise, emotions become inflamed and people’s behaviour spirals. We cannot allow this to persist. Somebody known to members of this house, I suspect, was quoted in this article in the Herald Sun:

“It was outrageous that this demonstration was allowed to take place tonight in a small park directly opposite the synagogue,” he said.

“The rabbis and the congregants have had to abandon regular Friday night Shabbat service and were sent home for their own safety. Many Australians will wonder what this country is coming to.”

Those are the words of Michael Danby, a former Labor MP for the seat of Melbourne Ports – somebody I suspect known to many people in this chamber and somebody widely respected across the political divide.

In relation to the Age, I think it is important we put that perspective on the record as well. ‘Gaza tensions high outside burnt Caulfield burger shop’ is the headline. The article says:

A suspicious fire at a Melbourne burger shop has become a focal point of local community tensions over the Gaza conflict even as police insist it did not appear to be politically motivated.

This is fairly critical, because the claim made by those who organised a group of protesters to go into the heart of Victoria’s Jewish community on a Friday night and protest opposite a synagogue was that this was in response to some hate crime. Here I am quoting again from the Age article:

Victoria Police Inspector Scott Dwyer told reporters in the afternoon he was “very confident” it was not an attack motivated by prejudice, but would not “go into the details of the incident or what evidence has been gathered”.

“All I can say is, I want to tell people I am very confident that this is not linked to a religious or political incident,” he said. “I would warn people not to make assumptions or draw lines of inquiry that aren’t there between this incident and anything else that is occurring.”

Victoria Police could not be much clearer about it, but that did not stop these people deciding it was a good idea to get a group of people to protest – an ugly protest – right opposite a synagogue in the heart of Melbourne’s Jewish community on Friday night at the start of the Jewish Sabbath. What were our police able to do? Can I say this with the great respect that I have for our Victoria Police: our Victoria Police did the best they could with what they had. They did the best they could with the resources they had, which are too few and far between. It is why my local police station in Malvern is going to be closed to the public for 16 hours a day now. I got an email today from the local inspector saying ‘Sorry, we just don’t have enough police. We’re closing your cop shop 16 hours a day to the public. Bad luck’. The police are understaffed massively under this government, but they also do not have the legislative powers that they need. That is what this matter is all about. We need to give police the powers and the resources they need to keep the peace, to keep Victorians safe. That is why clause (2) of this matter says that this house supports the reinstatement of Victoria Police’s full range of move-on and arrest powers.

Before I go to that I should note the statement that was issued on Sunday from Free Palestine Melbourne, which claim to be the organisers of the protests that shut down the synagogue on Friday night. It says:

Organisers were unaware that there was a Synagogue across the park, the Central Shule Chabad on Maple St, South Caulfield.

Well, people were not looking very hard, were they, if they were not aware that there was a synagogue there.

We apologise to the local Jewish community for the protest location that led to the evacuation of the synagogue, for any fear they may have felt and for the cancellation of Shabbat. We should not have gathered in this location. It was never our intention to disrupt or intimidate Jewish worshippers.

Well, it is not for me to accept it, not being a person of the Jewish faith, but I acknowledge the fact that the protest organisers have apologised. But why did it get to this point? Why did it get to a point where worshippers, reflecting their faith on a Friday night, were evacuated from their place of worship for their own safety? And the answer is: because the police did not have the powers to turn down the temperature of those protests. Those protests that led to people being pepper sprayed because they had turned violent.

Why is it police have to wait until a punch is thrown before they can make an arrest? Why do police have to wait until violence breaks out before they can make an arrest? Proper move-on powers – the move-on powers that the Liberals and Nationals provided to Victoria Police in 2014 – avoid the need for violence to erupt before the police can act. For example, and this is quoting from the act as it previously existed before Labor stripped away the powers, a move-on direction can be issued where:

the person is or persons are impeding or attempting to impede another person from lawfully entering or leaving premises or part of premises.

Premises like a synagogue – if anybody tries to stop a person lawfully entering or leaving a synagogue, they can be the subject of a move-on direction. Well, what is wrong with that? Why shouldn’t people have the freedom to enter their place of worship? It does not really matter whether it is a synagogue, whether it is a mosque, whether it is a temple or whether it is a church or any other place of worship. We say a lot of words about freedom of religion in this state. We have a Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities and an Equal Opportunity Act which pretend to protect it, but when push comes to shove people of faith in this state are always pushed to the back of the queue compared to the rights of people who want to protest against them, and that is wrong. That is absolutely wrong.

The sort of move-on powers that previously existed allowed for a move-on direction to be given where the conduct of the person or persons is causing a reasonable apprehension of violence in another person. We are not talking about somebody who sees a sign that they disagree with and thinks ‘I feel threatened’ – words of violence. We are not talking about this sort of nonsense, we are talking about a reasonable apprehension of violence. If somebody’s actions are causing a reasonable apprehension of violence in another, why shouldn’t they be subject to a direction to move on? Not a direction to arrest them, not a direction to put them in jail, not a direction to charge them or to fine them but a direction for them to move on – to try and turn down the temperature, to try and make sure that the social fabric of this city and this state is not rent in two. Because that is what sensible, proportionate move-on powers allow to occur, and that is why this side of the house is committed to them and why the government if it wanted to do something practical, sensible and possible could do it today. The government could reintroduce move-on powers. I understand the government is worried about unions and union protests. I understand that.

Members interjecting.

Michael O’BRIEN: Well, the member for Narre Warren South actually specifically talked about it today in his speech when I sought to introduce the private members bill to reinstate move-on powers, so I am not quite sure why they are arguing with me. We know that the government is very sensitive about union issues, but I would urge government members to have a look at what the lack of powers is doing in our city and in our state. Look at the fact that Victoria Police are simply having to stand there as referees with one hand tied behind their back because they do not have the powers to be able to deal with these issues properly and prevent them from escalating. I have got no doubt the members opposite were as appalled as I was – as we are – about what happened on Friday night.

So my question through you, Speaker, is: what is the government going to do about it? The government is very keen to talk up the police when they choose to, but it seems that they do not trust the police with move-on powers. Why is that? Why is it that the government is quite happy to stand there with uniformed officers whenever it suits them, roll them out for a press conference whenever it suits them, but when it comes to trusting them with sensible, proportionate move-on powers there is no trust between this Labor government and Victoria Police?

This is too important. We cannot have a situation where neo-Nazi morons are marauding through train carriages in Melbourne demanding to know which passengers are Jewish and the police throwing up their hands saying ‘I don’t think they’ve committed an offence’. A move-on power would allow people to be directed to move on, and if they breach that, then they can be arrested. The government may say, ‘We don’t like what you propose, member for Malvern. We don’t like move-on powers.’ We are hearing the sounds of silence from those opposite. They have no idea. The $3 million they committed before the last election to tackle antisemitism – how much of that has actually been spent? Zero. Doughnuts. Absolute doughnuts. This government does not know how to deal with these issues. All it can do is say no, no, no. Well, Victorians cannot afford to wait any longer. Our social cohesion and our reputation for being a tolerant multicultural community is at risk. It is at risk today. People are feeling fear. Kids are feeling fear going to school. People are feeling fear in the streets. A man cannot even ride his bicycle down Chapel Street without getting punched for daring to have an Israeli flag on the back. That is what this city and state have come to. We call on the government to listen to common sense, reinstate sensible move-on laws, give the police the tools that they need to keep Victorians safe and to protect Victorians’ rights to their faith.

The SPEAKER: Before I call the member for Box Hill, can I acknowledge in the gallery the Ambassador of the Republic of Poland Maciej Chmieliński and the Honorary Consul General of the Republic of Poland Andrew Soszyński.

Paul HAMER (Box Hill) (16:17): I rise to speak on the member for Malvern’s matter of public importance, and at the outset I would like to repeat the words in the matter of public importance because of their importance:

That this house reaffirms that no Victorian should face harassment on account of their faith …

We have many matters of public importance that are debated on a Wednesday afternoon, but few are as important as ensuring the social cohesion of our communities and ensuring that all of our communities can live in peace and can gather peacefully, free of harassment from others. We must stand united against antisemitism and against hatred in all its forms. The people of Israel, the Palestinian people and indeed all of humanity deserve nothing less. Both Jewish communities and Palestinian communities are suffering at the moment from the unimaginable grief of friends and relatives who they are mourning, but this does not provide any excuse for the scenes that we saw on Friday night or any form of antisemitism, Islamophobia or any form of hatred directed in our great state.

It is not an exaggeration to say that the Melbourne Jewish community is living in fear at the moment. It is a fear that I have never seen in my life as a Jewish person in Australia, and it is a fear that I never thought that I would see living in a liberal democracy such as Australia. I think it is quite poignant that the ambassador for Poland is in the room today, because as a child of a Holocaust survivor from Poland the family came here to escape the worst of antisemitism. For many, many years Australia, and Victoria in particular, has been such a safe haven for the Jewish community and indeed many other communities right around the world. To see these actions and to see these antisemitic incidents is really incredibly traumatic and incredibly difficult. As the member for Malvern rightly said, all people should be able to worship in safety and free from anxiety. All people should be able to freely express themselves, gather in their groups and gather together without fear of being persecuted.

I want to just reflect a little bit on the events of Friday night. I note that the trigger for the event and for the rally appeared to be the characterisation of the event as a hate crime. As the member for Malvern said, this had been put out in quite clear terms, not opinion, by Victoria Police that they did not consider this a hate crime or politically motivated. Notwithstanding even the owner of the shop asking people not to protest, people did still come and protest, and protesting in the most highly concentrated Jewish area in the whole of Australia on a Friday night just before the Sabbath is nothing if not inflammatory.

I want to also call out a member of the other place, the Leader of the Greens, who on Sunday repeated her call that this needed to be investigated as a hate crime. This was after the police had repeatedly indicated what their view of it was on the Friday afternoon. This incident does need to be investigated, as any suspected arson needs to be investigated, and we need to let Victoria Police do their work and investigate the crime properly without trying to put our own perspectives on what the motivations for that crime might be which are going to enrage and incite people to commit antisemitic responses.

I want to talk a little bit about what antisemitism is in the context of the debate that we are having today. I think we have talked in this place quite a lot about antisemitism as it appears from the far right, and I think we have been very successful in achieving cross-party support for banning the Nazi flag and banning Nazi gestures, because we all know that those gestures are a form of hate. It has always been a little bit difficult to grapple with antisemitism when it comes from other sources. I want to thank the Allan government and the Andrews government before that for adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism, because it is very instructive in terms of the debate that we are now having and what we see around the community. The IHRA definition provides a tool for all Victorians to understand what constitutes antisemitism. It is not a legal definition. It is a definition for education; it is a definition to try and assist people to understand the difference between antisemitism and legitimate criticism of Israel. I would like to just identify what the IHRA definition actually says. The IHRA definition of antisemitism is that:

Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.

Rather helpfully, the definition also goes into quite some detail about differentiating between legitimate critique of a national government and antisemitism. It specifically says that:

… criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.

However, it also says that:

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life … include, but are not limited to:

…

Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,

Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

…

Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

When we see actions such as we saw on the weekend and the incidents described by the member for Malvern, these have no place in our great state, and they need to be called out as antisemitic. I want to also just provide some information about the increase in antisemitic incidents that have occurred since 7 October. In the last five weeks there have been over 1000 calls for assistance to the Jewish Community Security Group, and this compares to just over 300 in the 10 months up until that time. Not all of these incidents are considered antisemitic, and they are not recorded as antisemitic incidents in the report, but of those that have been reported over the last five weeks there have been 129 total antisemitic incidents that have been recorded by the Jewish Community Security Group. That compares to just nine in the same period last year. Verbal abuse constituted 49 of these cases and threats 20 of these cases, and there were various other incidents that were reported, including graffiti, written abuse, online abuse, gestures, property damage and assault. Of course these are only the ones that have been reported.

I want to provide the house with one of my own personal experiences, or that of someone from my family. This was not reported. This was not included in the incidents, and perhaps it would not have even been considered for an antisemitic report. A member of my family was walking to their job in the city, and they were asked are you with Israel or are you against Israel. On the face of that, that might not be seen as antisemitic, but no-one in our society should have to make that public call to anybody else. That is all their own personal decision, and they should not have to be confronted with that wherever they are.

I also want to just briefly touch on some of the messaging that we do see out in the community, and I have seen this in some of the signage that we do see at some of the rallies. I do want to put on record that in my view the vast majority of people who are turning up to the rallies are doing so in support of their family and in support of a peace that they want to achieve. As I said before, there is nothing inherently antisemitic or antisemitic about asking for war to stop, in seeking peace. But one of the most difficult signs that I did see, which was well publicised in the media, was a sign at the rally that said ‘Lets clean the world from rubbish’. It had the old recycling sign with that stick figure placing a Star of David in the bin. This must be called out as antisemitic. It may not have been arranged by the organisers of the rally, but it is really important if you are going to say that you stand against all forms of racism, you stand against antisemitism, you stand against Islamophobia, that you call out the incidences within your own ranks that are trying to divide and are trying to make those claims, because they hurt all of us. Words do matter, and in times of conflict words matter more.

Peter WALSH (Murray Plains) (16:32): I rise to support the matter of public importance (MPI) submitted by the member for Malvern:

That this house reaffirms that no Victorian should face harassment on account of their faith, and therefore:

(1) condemns the intimidatory protest held in close proximity to a Caulfield synagogue on 10 November 2023; and

(2) supports the reinstatement of Victoria Police’s full range of move-on and arrest powers.

There are two very distinct but linked things in the member for Malvern’s MPI. The first is the condemnation of those protests on 10 November. I do not think anyone in this house or any other Victorian could really comprehend what it would have been like for the people at that synagogue in that particular circumstance. No-one in Victoria should be subjected to that sort of event, to the sort of bigotry seen there. We have seen what is happening in the Middle East, and that is an issue in itself, but it should not be brought to Australia. It is appalling that it is being brought to Australia, and I support the previous speaker’s comments about the fact that words matter. We had this debate in this place a couple of sittings ago. You cannot nuance this issue. You cannot nuance away the fact that there are people being killed. You cannot nuance away the fact that Hamas actually attacked Israel. You cannot nuance away the fact that there were 1300 or 1400 people killed. You cannot nuance away the fact that there are over 200 hostages still being held. There are women and children still being held as hostages. You cannot nuance that away. It is absolutely appalling that this issue should rear its head in Australia and in Victoria. I think we are all proud of the fact that we are a multicultural society. In some ways we are one of the most multicultural societies in the world. Look at some of the communities in country Victoria – take Robinvale, for example. You could not get a more multicultural community anywhere in Victoria than what is in Robinvale – look at the number of languages that are spoken at the primary school there, because it is a melting pot of a lot of people coming to Australia.

I just cannot speak strongly enough in support of the member for Malvern in his condemnation of that particular protest there, which comes to the second point. We need to make sure police have powers, as was discussed in the debate this morning by the member for Malvern and others about giving the police the powers to make sure they can stop these sorts of things happening before they actually happen. It is too late for police to be able to come in and act once violence has happened. Once people’s blood is up, people do crazy things. It is just a fact of life, unfortunately, that when people’s blood is up, when the heat of the moment is happening, it gets out of hand. It is unsafe for those that are personally involved, but it is also unsafe for police. Why should we put police in circumstances where they cannot act until it is too late? That is effectively what we are seeing in this circumstance. We have to think of the police. Those on the other side of the house like to paint this as us being anti police because we want to give police the laws that give them the power to do the things that they want to do. There may be someone in police hierarchy that does not want it, as the Minister for Police kept interjecting in the debate this morning, but the rank-and-file police and the Police Association Victoria, as I understand it, want these laws brought back in. They want to have the powers so that they can actually intercede in these circumstances and they can stop it before it gets bad, before someone gets hurt, before police are put in the situation where they are at risk of being hurt in the event of going in when it is all too late. As I said, I support the member for Malvern and the other speakers who will be condemning that particular protest.

I want to spend some time on supporting the reinstatement of the police’s full range of move-on powers and arrest powers, and I think the issues of the last few weeks have brought that into real focus. But what I want to spend some of my time talking about is how these powers can actually help in regional Victoria. We have had a lot of discussions in this house about the timber industry and the protesters in the timber industry who go into coupes and cause trouble. They do what they call ‘black wallaby’, where they get dressed up as a wallaby and they hide in the dark. A machinery operator gets in their truck in the dark to drive out, gets into their bulldozer or gets into their log hauler, and all of a sudden a protester will jump out in front of them when they are moving. They literally panic that they are going to kill someone, and if they hit someone they are in trouble. But there is no way the police can stop those protesters going into those coupes until they actually do something wrong and break the law, and that is an issue for the timber industry there.

There are people who have effectively left the timber industry – apart from the fact that the Andrews government, now the Allan government, is closing it down – because of the stress that was caused to them by the protesters in those logging coupes. You have the situation where they put spikes on the road, so you are driving a B-double timber truck at reasonable speed on sometimes not the best gravel roads within the forest, you run over spikes and you do tyres. That is a very dangerous situation for those people driving those trucks and something that should not happen, and the fact is that police have not got the powers when they know there are protesters there. They know protesters are doing things that will cause trouble in the future, but they do not have the powers to do anything about that. An even worse situation is where they drive spikes into the actual tree. They know that when the chainsaw or the harvesting head hits those spikes, it shatters, it bounces back and it actually puts the operator of that machinery at risk.

A member: It can kill them.

Peter WALSH: As the interjection said, it can kill someone. Again it is protesters doing things where police could, if they had the powers, actually stop some of those particular issues happening. Protesters also put themselves up a tree, chain themselves to a tree, to stop people from cutting the trees down. Again, if the protesters are in the vicinity and the police know that this is what they are going to do, those move-on powers could stop those issues happening.

The worst thing possible that I have seen or have had reported to me that protesters have done in the forestry coupes is take children in there with them. They actually take children into the coupes and let children be around large, heavy machinery, knowing that the machinery operators cannot move that machinery and cannot do the work they need to do because there are children there. It is unsafe. That closes the coupe down for days, because quite often these coupes are a long way away from a police station. They are a long way away from the officers that can go there and do something about it, so they can lose two or three days work while they are waiting for someone to come along and take these protesters away – if they have broken the law in a way police can do something about, because just being in the vicinity of a logging coupe is not breaking the law but it can stop people from going about their particular work.

I would like to finish on the issue of animal protesters, and we saw the issue at Sinclair’s abattoir in Benalla a couple of months ago, where protesters broke in in the middle of the night and chained themselves into the CO₂ chamber in that particular abattoir. The Sinclair family has been operating that abattoir for a long time. They know what they are doing, and they are working to best practice. But they went to work and they had protesters chained inside the chamber there, who would have been at risk if the whole process had started. But they chained themselves in there, and police did not have the power to stop them going in there in the first instance. People knew they were there, but until they broke into the premises, until they actually broke the law, no-one could do anything about it. The issue was going to be that in the future they were going to blockade it and stop the trucks delivering the pigs to that particular abattoir. Again, if police had the move-on power laws to stop that happening, people that are doing lawful commerce and carrying out a role in society that makes sure that we are fed could be protected to go about the work that they do there. We see the same issue with the poultry industry. We see the same issue with the pig production industry, where people go in and they put at risk the biosecurity of that particular farm. They do not care, but the farmer does care. In the last couple of seconds left, there is the whole issue of Gippy Goat, where the farm was invaded down there – John Gommans had his property invaded and had livestock stolen. His staff were stressed when they had 60 people walking down the drive at 6:30 in the morning. Those sorts of things should be able to be stopped by police before they happen, and that is why I support the member for Malvern’s matter to reinstate those move-on laws and arrest powers.

Nick STAIKOS (Bentleigh) (16:42): I rise to make a contribution on the matter of public importance which has been moved by the member for Malvern, and I would respectfully say to the member for Malvern that it would have been ideal if his matter of public importance stopped at point (1) at this current time. I say that for a number of reasons, but perhaps I will get point (2) out of the way first and then move on to the more substantive issue.

It is wrong, in my view, to link the current tensions that we are dealing with in Melbourne as a result of events overseas with a decade-long political argument in this house. In 2014 the then government introduced these move-on laws, and they were introduced in response to union protests – that is a fact. At the time the then Labor opposition committed to repeal those laws, and that was done when we came to government the next year. The opposition attempted to reintroduce those laws in 2019, so it has been something that they have been committed to for some time. Those of us on this side of the house know that it is about unions. That is what it is about – it is about unions. I mean, we also just heard from the Leader of the Nationals about some agricultural issues, and you know, that is all very important. But today we should be discussing Victoria’s status as the greatest example of multiculturalism in all the world, despite what is happening. We should be standing in solidarity with faith communities today supporting them to freely practise their faith. Those are the things that are important.

The member for Malvern knows that we do currently have move-on laws – the police currently have powers to move people on. The police can tell a person to move on from a public place if they reasonably believe that a person is breaching the peace or likely to do so, is putting another person in danger or likely to do so, is likely to injure someone or damage property or is likely to be a risk to public safety. The police may tell a person to stay away from a public place for up to 24 hours. If the person does not move on or stay away, police can give the person an on-the-spot fine or arrest them. So we do have current move-on laws, we absolutely do.

The member for Malvern talked about police resources. Over the nine years that we have been in government, the government has always had a policy of giving our police the resources and the powers that they have asked for in order to keep our community safe. That is why Victoria currently has the biggest police force in Australia – it is because of our government. Our major investment in police resources grew the size of Victoria Police by 20 per cent. That was back in 2016 or 2017. Thanks to our government Victoria Police have the resources that they need to keep our community safe, and the government will continue to provide Victoria Police with those resources and those powers that they need. On police, I do want to thank our dedicated police members, particularly those at Caulfield police station, who I meet with regularly, and particularly our district inspector and our senior sergeant. I met with our senior sergeant just last week, and I know that they are working exceptionally hard at the moment to not only keep the local community safe but to also play their part in keeping tensions down as much as possible. I thank our district inspector, our senior sergeant and all of their members for always going above and beyond. They always go above and beyond.

Now I would like to turn to point (1) of the member for Malvern’s matter of public importance. Last Friday a number of us in this house were at the Premier’s Diwali state reception with 1200 other people. The member for Caulfield was there too. It was a colourful celebration of multiculturalism in this state. It was a wonderful event. I was there with the Jain community from my electorate over in Moorabbin. It was also a celebration of people who have come to Australia, made it their home and have not had to give up their culture or their faith. They come and celebrate it here in Victoria, in the greatest multicultural place on earth, and also worship freely.

That night, unfortunately, something absolutely awful was taking place in Caulfield, which is adjacent to my electorate. I will just say this, and I will say it very clearly: if you have a problem with the way that Israel has responded to that heinous terrorist attack on 7 October – and I know many people do – do not take it out on your fellow Australians. That is wrong – that is absolutely wrong. Our Jewish community, like all faith communities, have a right to worship in peace and in safety. I think holding that rally in the Jewish community heartland of Melbourne raised tensions in a way that they should not have been raised.

It is not just those of us in this house who are elected to these positions or the police who have a role to play to maintain the peace and to defend our peaceful, harmonious, multicultural society; it is the responsibility of all Victorians. I said earlier today that the horrible images we see on our television screens and on social media day after day after day at the moment – those things are beyond our comprehension. The loss of life in Israel and Gaza is beyond the comprehension of those of us who won the lottery of life to be Australian – it really is.

The only role we can play is to defend our peaceful, harmonious society, and it does start with leadership. It starts with leadership in this place. We have a special responsibility to make sure that we are keeping the temperature down, because you know what: that is what is going to help our police to do their job – if we show leadership, if we keep tensions down. We can talk about move-on laws all we like, but we have to maintain a peaceful, harmonious society. We need to jealously guard our peaceful diversity, which is the envy of the world. Our multiculturalism is the envy of the world. It is no accident that Melbourne, for instance, is ranked the best international student city in Australia and now the fourth best in the world. It is not just because we have fantastic universities, it is also because we are a multicultural society. That is something that we have to jealously guard, and as I said it starts with leadership in this place.

I would also like to conclude by just once again highlighting our government’s commitment to fighting antisemitism and prejudice. I am really proud that it was this government that was the first in Australia to criminalise the public display of the Nazi swastika and the Nazi salute, and we know that those new laws are already working to keep our communities safe. I am also proud that it was our government that introduced compulsory Holocaust education in schools. I am proud that our government adopted the International Holocaust Remembance Alliance definition of antisemitism. I am proud that our government has funded the Holocaust centre over in Elsternwick. I am proud of all of these things, because we stand united with diverse communities, and it is those communities that have built Victoria and made it the cosmopolitan vibrant place it is today. I will repeat that it starts with leadership in here. We all have a role to play, all 88 of us in this house, to try and turn the temperature down. I again say that is the best thing we can do to assist our police at this very, very challenging time.

David SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (16:51): I rise to support the member for Malvern’s matter of public importance today condemning the protest held in close proximity to the Central Shule Caulfield synagogue on 10 November 2023 and support the reinstatement of Victoria’s full range of move-on arrest powers. I want to begin by saying that a number of colleagues in here have spoken today about words mattering, and words absolutely matter. The member for Box Hill has rightly pointed that out, particularly when those words are directed at individuals because of their race, their religion, their sexual preference, whatever, to actually incite hate and target people because of who they are – no question. I also want to say that when it comes to leaders, ultimately actions speak louder than words. To combat that, and the words in the attack, we need to ensure that we stand up and provide whatever laws and whatever powers are necessary to ensure the haters do not continue to cause the pain and suffering that they do and, worse, violence and potentially ultimately death.

We all, quite rightfully so, in this matter of public importance today refer to the events on the Sabbath outside Caulfield Central Shule, because that was a crossing-the-line moment that we will all remember. It had never been seen before in our state that a people of faith during a Sabbath service would be targeted in the way that they were. I want to go back, because a number in this chamber have spoken about the swastika ban which we worked together on, rightfully so, and the Nazi salute ban which we worked together on, rightfully so, with a number of different laws and funding for institutions not just of the Jewish community but of a number of multicultural communities, because the multicultural part of Victoria is what makes us strong. It is what people talk about. I do not think there is a person in this chamber, when they go and talk at events, that forgets to mention just how important the multicultural fabric of Victoria is. It is really our secret ingredient. But when it is threatened like it has been not just over the events of the Sabbath but over a long period, and when things are getting worse and worse and people are allowed to get away with what they are getting away with, we need to act.

For me, one of the biggest tipping points and triggering points was when the Nazis turned up. They turned up a couple of times on the steps of Parliament, which we all remember – horrific. The police did what they could, but they stood by and they did some investigations afterwards, unfortunately after a lot of the hate had taken place. They did their salutes outside the front. They did what they did. We all remember that, and there was not much that was done. What really for me changed the game – and I remember on the Sunday being in Elsternwick and starting to get imagery sent to me – was that the night before you had these Nazis turning up at Flinders Street station, going down the escalator doing the Nazi salute and onto a train, wandering up and down and trying to intimidate people and asking them who was Jewish on the train. Somebody pulled out a blue-and-white handkerchief. They thought that signified potentially that they had a flag and asked them whether they were Jewish. That, for me, is crossing the line – and police were present.

I know our Shadow Minister for Police in here and a number of people have spoken about police. We all talk about what an amazing job our police do on the front line, but when police tell you that they are limited in what they can do – they will watch and they will observe and when something ultimately happens they will actually step in – why are we waiting for something to happen? Why should we wait for somebody to be hit, punched or worse? Why? Nobody expects that. Nobody deserves that. The amount of phone calls that I have had since then and coming on from 7 October, largely leading to so many different acts of people seeing signs, horrific things – why can’t the police do something? Why can’t the government do something? My phone has blown up. My office – my staff are beside themselves because we do not have the answers. I wish we had the answers. I wish I could tell people we have got it sorted for you. I know the work that we have done with the government. I have sat with the Premier, the Deputy Premier and the Minister for Police, and we have spoken countless times about what we can do. A lot of the people who have spoken have said we do not need these laws. It is about unions and everything else. It is not about that. It is about people knowing that when somebody is after them, when something happens, the police can do something. That is all they want: that the police can do something. I have been told by police in the stations all the way up to command that the move-on laws we had back then in 2014, when they were introduced, would do the trick. They would do the trick.

I know that in New South Wales they have a different system where every protest needs to be registered. Every single time you go out publicly you have to register it. Do we want to go down that path where every single cultural event has to be registered? That might be an option. I do not know what the option would be, but doing the same will not be an option. Doing nothing will not be an option. We cannot just turn around and say ‘Let’s do some social cohesion stuff’. I can tell you from meeting with the Jewish Community Council of Victoria – the JCCV – and others that we have run out of goodwill when it comes to just having another meeting about social cohesion. The goodwill is out the window. With due respect to the Islamic Council of Victoria, they put out that statement the other day already pointing the finger at the Jewish community for the Burgertory place being burnt down after Victoria Police had put out a statement that said the burning down of that business was not racially motivated. Afterwards they decided to put that out. We want to bring community leaders together when they are pointing the finger at the Jewish community and saying ‘You burnt down a store. No wonder you had people wandering down and turning up in vigilante groups’. That was 4 hours before that event took place, 4 hours before they turned up in Caulfield – to a Jewish synagogue in Caulfield – 4 hours. There were Facebook things, social media posts graphically designed saying ‘Turn up to Caulfield’, so everyone knew it was about to happen.

I was at the Diwali event – absolutely I was – with the member for Bentleigh, and once my phone went off I left and went down to show my support. By that stage, thankfully, a lot of it had settled. But, I tell you what, the memories have not settled. People are not calm. Yes, we want to do whatever we can in terms of harmony. We want to be able to say we have got the powers. We want to be able to say police will be able to respond. Police – fantastic. I want to commend the government for ensuring that we have got additional resources, another 60 police patrolling at the moment. That is fantastic, and the fact that there is an investigation to look at the footage of the rocks, of the bottles, of things thrown. Again, at that time the line could not be broken to arrest the people that were doing it, because they were under-resourced at the time. We need the resources. When these events take place, we need to have planned for them.

Ultimately, what the member for Malvern’s matter today is all about is giving them the powers to respond. We cannot have situations like when a guy cycles down Chapel Street with a flag on his back, the flag gets ripped off and he gets punched in the face. We cannot have that here. The move-on laws started way back in 2014. From 2010 to 2014 we had chocolate shops like Max Brenner that were shut down because they were Jewish. We have had Elbit, which the disgraceful Greens were talking about boycotting, today. Elbit is an Australian-owned business that does bushfire response stuff for Victoria and for Victorians. This crazy lot, the Greens, want to boycott them. We cannot have that.

We talk about harmony and we talk about working together, and I know the government has the goodwill there. But I plead with them: if not today in supporting the move-on laws, then maybe tomorrow. We just cannot wait with our hands tied behind our backs – or, worse still, we cannot wait with Victoria Police having their hands tied behind their backs – because ultimately the community are unsafe, and that is not what Victorians expect.

Nina TAYLOR (Albert Park) (17:01): Obviously there is a lot of sensitivity regarding the matter of public importance that we have here today, and I am very mindful of that. I am very mindful that there are many in the community that are hurting deeply with regard to what I think has been very difficult for us all to witness – the events that have been happening in the Middle East of late.

I will, before I speak to those aspects of the discussion, just touch on the aspect of police powers. I think it is important to examine what move-on powers the police currently do have to manage this. I do not say this in any way to patronise at all. Victoria Police obviously make important decisions every minute of every day, and I do not envy the difficulty of their role. The police can tell a person to move on from a public place if they reasonably believe that a person is breaching the peace or likely to do so, putting another person in danger or likely to do so, likely to injure someone or damage property or likely to be a risk to public safety – and I note the word ‘likely’. Police may tell a person to stay away from the public place for up to 24 hours. If a person does not move on or stay away, police can give the person an on-the-spot fine or arrest them. Turning to protests, a police officer can tell a person to move on in circumstances where they are protesting and that person is putting the safety of another person in danger or is likely to do so or they are doing something that is likely to injure someone or damage property. In other words, the police have move-on powers, appropriately, where there is a risk to safety or violence.

Respectfully, I would say that we do have to be careful in this space. We cannot be naive as to history with regard to some more significant police power enhancement that I believe the opposition are seeking to put forward and the very unnecessary and, dare I say, at-risk, draconian ramifications that could result were they able to fulfil that particular pathway, which at the same time would in no way enhance or support the safety and security of multicultural or multifaith communities. I put it quite bluntly to the chamber: we should not be naive to the fact of what it has meant in the past. I respect the difference between peaceful protest and what could be interpreted as criminalising peaceful protest, and I think there are significant risks that cannot be overlooked. It was a very salient point – I should say a very important point – put forward by the member for Bentleigh about conflating the two matters: that is, the disturbing events that occurred on the Sabbath and ‘Oh well, let’s really arc up the police powers’. In conflating those two elements I can see significant risk. I think there has been an attempt to undermine what that actually would mean and translate to for the Victorian community, and at the same time that would not deliver the panacea that is being put forward by the opposition.

I would now like to return to what I think is perhaps the most meaningful element in terms of being able to preserve the beautiful multicultural state that we are, that I dearly love and that I believe everyone in this chamber would love also. I could not imagine Victoria any other way, and I would not have it any other way. We live in this state for so many reasons, and one of them is because of its beautiful diversity. We therefore have an unequivocal commitment, which you can see by actions taken to date and those that are continuing. I want to note further even the concept of peace per se is not a continuum just because. Peace is only preserved by good people being vigilant and by taking those very positive steps which we are, and I actually want to thank our multifaith and multicultural communities for the incredible work that they do day in, day out fostering really significant, important relationships and understanding that enables social cohesion in addition to of course important structural reforms that have been put in place and further structural reform that needs to take place.

I did want to say quite emphatically there is no place for violence, hatred or inciteful behaviour in Victoria, and it is unacceptable for any faith-based community to feel unsafe at their own place of worship or in their neighbourhoods. That is not lip-service. I say that hand on heart. I am speaking here to broader principles because I think when we are looking at fostering the most peaceful and harmonious Victoria now and into the future that these guiding principles can underpin the best decision-making for everyone’s benefit. I know I have heard of students being scared to wear the kippah and to be publicly identified as Jewish, and that just horrifies me. You should be absolutely able to be your complete self in terms of being able to express your faith in a respectful way. Similarly, I should make the comparison of being able to wear a hijab and not ever feel in any way persecuted wherever you choose to walk, again, in our great state.

Can I say of course we vehemently oppose antisemitism, racism of any kind and Islamophobia of any kind. There is absolutely no place for it. It will not advance us as a community in any way at any time. I know that my learned colleague from Box Hill put forward some statistics on the escalation in verbal abuse, in threats and in symbols, paraphernalia and graffiti. It is very disturbing of itself to see that kind of behaviour, so it is up to us within the chamber but also the community as a collective. Every single member of the Victorian community has a role to play in preserving that which we value and hold dear – that is, peace and harmony and respect for diversity. I also want to take this opportunity to support the Premier’s call requesting that Victorians show each other love, care and support in these difficult times, because it would be no less than a travesty in any way to see any kind of replication of what we are seeing overseas in terms of violence and hateful conduct. It has no place in Victoria. I would like to think genuinely that the overwhelming majority of Victorians want to feel that they can be their authentic selves, honouring and respecting each other, living in peace and harmony and being able to express their faith or their cultural identity without fear of persecution of any kind.

I should say I am pleased with the work that we are doing in particular – I am just speaking as the Parliamentary Secretary for Justice – because we know that the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 does not do enough to protect Victorians from multicultural backgrounds. That is absolutely conceded, hence intense work is underway. I have attended a number of the round tables with multicultural and multifaith representatives who are working very constructively, collectively, to ensure that we do strengthen those much-needed protections for all Victorians into the future. It is conceded that we are not where we need to be yet, so this good work needs to be done. I do not want to resile from the importance of further changes that need to be made, but we are unequivocally committed to that. It is happening as we speak.

Brad BATTIN (Berwick) (17:11): I rise to support the member for Malvern’s matter of public importance (MPI). As I start, I would just like to say to the member for Box Hill: thank you for sharing. It is a difficult time for you and for my friend the member for Caulfield. You have had to face this, not just in a political sense in Parliament but in your communities and within your families as well. I know probably not many people are sitting at home watching you now online, but I would encourage the three people that may be watching to go back and read your contribution in Hansard. I think it is a genuine part of what Parliament should all be about. Member for Caulfield, I know we have spoken a few times on this, and we join you in condemning the behaviour. As I put on my Facebook post, whilst I cannot control what is going on overseas – I have really got no influence at all – I do have an influence here in Victoria. We have to be a voice, we have to be strong and we have to stay united in some of our messaging. And some of that messaging is: there was no reason for people to go to Caulfield to protest unless they were trying to incite something. There was no reason in the world that they decided to go to protest in Caulfield and not out the front of the Victorian Parliament. That is where we protest. If you want protest, go for your life outside of here. If it is a peaceful protest, this is the place to protest, not outside a mosque, not outside a synagogue, not outside a church, not outside a school. There are places for this where it can be safer, and they were just there to incite violence.

I am going to speak a little bit, obviously, from the police side of this, and I am going to have to put on record that I am a bit disappointed that the Minister for Police is not speaking on this matter of public importance, because it is something that impacts every single person that he is supposed to be standing up for in this place. Victoria Police members each and every day have a very, very difficult job. Whilst they are on the street, they have got to work within the laws that are dictated to them by this place – rules that come to them from people in here that may not share the same values as them. Each person in Victoria Police is a different representative from the community, but they do their job with distinction. They go out there and do everything they can to keep our communities safe. Every single one of them works hard to protect not just us in here but every single person in our community.

I have heard a couple of members say that the police already have, effectively, move-on laws. It is just not the case. If you go and speak to the Police Association Victoria, they will explain to you why the difference is there. Each and every day a police member walks out of a station now, it has changed. They used to put on a gun, a baton and a belt, and that was about it. Now they carry every single weapon you can think of, but one of the things that is probably the biggest change for them is that they have to wear body-worn cameras every single place they go. Everyone on the street now carries a camera. Everything is filmed. If they make the slightest mistake, the media or others are so quick to condemn them, which is just so wrong. I have said this before: we hear of coroners reports that come back after two years of consideration to tell us that a police officer did something wrong in a split second. It is exactly the same as what happens now with social media and media – so quickly Victoria Police get condemned for their behaviour when, if you go and look into it in more detail, they are generally doing the right thing to protect our community.

The move-on laws give them the opportunity to prevent what happened on Friday in Caulfield. They give them the genuine opportunity to go in peacefully and move people on using directions, and I am going to say usually just using words, to ensure they can provide safety for the people who are going about their legal business or – as a Liberal, I do not just talk about their legal business – their freedoms, including their freedom of religion, their freedom of association and their right to go to a workplace, to be safe and to be on a train. To see the actions that the member for Caulfield has referred to on one of our own train lines, where a group of thugs, neo-Nazis, decided it was okay to go down the escalator doing the Nazi symbol on the way down, the Nazi sign, to harass passengers, to get on a train and try to find out if there was anyone that was Jewish on there, effectively with the intention of creating fear – and Victoria Police had to stand there and watch that.

If the powers the government has given them already – which two members have mentioned – are there, that is the occasion that they should have been used. Why were they not used? I suggest strongly that members of the government go and speak to those police and ask them why they were not used. They are genuinely fearful every day of being sued. They are genuinely fearful of the reaction that is going to come back through media, and they just do not get the support – and definitely not from the current minister. The former minister I would actually say did stand up for them. Lisa Neville, the former minister, at least stood up for Victoria Police. The current minister is missing at the time they need this support the most. They are out there at the moment every single day of the week trying to protect Victorians, and the minister cannot even come in here and speak on an MPI. The only time he spoke in this Parliament today was about the races. It is the only thing he has spoken about in this chamber.

Juliana Addison: He’s the Minister for Racing.

Brad BATTIN: He is the Minister for Racing, but guess what? He is the Minister for Police. Seventeen thousand Victoria Police officers at the moment need their minister to be standing up for them. Eight hundred police officers every day are not available for duty because there are those vacancies. Another 700-plus are currently off work because of PTSD and mental health issues. We had one scratching at the Melbourne Cup, and that made more media than 700 police not available for shift. That is just simply wrong. That is because this minister has his priorities wrong – totally the wrong way around.

The members at the moment are looking for support. They have got an enterprise bargaining agreement (EBA) negotiation coming up. They are not asking for numbers. They are not even asking for a lot when it comes to their wage. What they are asking for is support and respect, and that has to start in this place. This means they need the powers to go out to do their job. To ensure that we are going to protect them in the event that something happens, they should not have to worry about losing their family home, they should not have to worry about losing their job just for doing their role in the community and protecting us. It is already hard enough.

The member for Malvern referred to 43 stations that had their reception hours reduced. In Malvern specifically they were reduced to 8 hours. I can tell you from personal experience Malvern police station is a busy station – people automatically think of Toorak and those wonderful spots around there – they have got Chadstone shopping centre. Chadstone shopping centre will take you off the road for a long period of time nearly every shift. I would guarantee that. They also back up Prahran. They go into Chapel Street. They support other people in those areas. The stations that are closed: Springvale has got reduced hours; Sunbury – we have had stabbings in Sunbury recently all over the media and youth crime on the way up, and yet we are going to reduce the hours in the police station.

Why? Because this government has failed to act when it has come to recruiting for Victoria Police over the last three years, and we have seen a decline year on year, which means we have less police available to do the duties that we need. Year on year we have had police numbers being reduced. That is just simply not good enough. We need to make sure that we can get the police numbers there that we need to protect Victorians but more importantly to protect themselves so they can go out there knowing that there is a backup van down the road, that if anything gets out of hand, someone is going to come and support them.

The next step in this is this government is now trying to negotiate in the EBA to remove the protections ensuring we have got one-man stations across regional Victoria. Therefore a station that is a single-man station – we will use an example – Forrest, in the event that they were short in Colac, they could roster the member for Forrest in Colac. So if it is a 40-degree day, that means we have got no-one there for community safety because that person will now be in Colac. That is 50 minutes away. That is unfair on the Forrest community. There are 93 stations like that – 93 stations where you are willing to move the one man away to other areas and take them away from those stations.

What this MPI – whilst it is the condemnation of what happened on that Friday, which should never happen, and the reinstatement of the arrest powers and the move-on powers, as moved by the member for Malvern – is about is respect for our Victoria Police, and it is about time that this government shows that respect. This minister needs to go out and explain why he is silent on these issues when it comes to police numbers, when it comes to backing police out on the street, when it comes to having the discussions to protect one-man stations and when it comes to reducing hours in Victoria Police stations across the entire state. If the minister wants to continue to go to the races, that is fine. Maybe just be the Minister for Racing and hand on the portfolio to somebody else, because 16,000 to 17,000 Victoria Police officers need and are desperate for someone in this place to be their voice, otherwise it will continue declining and we are going to have a more unsafe Victoria.

Martha HAYLETT (Ripon) (17:21): I rise to speak on the matter of public importance submitted by the member for Malvern today. I want to begin by saying how proud I am of our state’s diverse multicultural and multifaith communities. There are many Muslim and Jewish people across my electorate of Ripon, including the proud Muslim community of Ararat and the Jewish community of Ballarat. As a government we are committed to taking action to stamp out racism, faith-based discrimination and hate in any form. Racism and discrimination, including antisemitism and Islamophobia, are unacceptable and have no place in our great state. There is no place for violence or inciteful behaviour in Victoria, and it is never acceptable for any faith-based community to feel unsafe in their own neighbourhood and at their place of worship.

The scenes we saw last Friday in Caulfield were shocking. They go against the fundamental values that we hold in this place and in this state. We treasure our multicultural fabric in this state. Our diversity is our greatest strength, and it is crucial that we protect it to make sure every single community can live safely and securely in Victoria. We must protect every Victorian’s right to practise their religion, beliefs, traditions and festivals freely and without fear. Last Friday night, though, members of our Jewish community in Caulfield did not feel safe to practise their religion.

Friday night marks the beginning of Shabbat, the Jewish day of rest, a holy and sacred day celebrated by Jewish people around the world every week for millennia. I have joined Jewish friends of mine for Shabbat dinner, and I know how joyous it is. But last Friday there was no joy for the Central Shule community in Caulfield South. Their service was cancelled and evacuated due to a protest that should not have ever happened in that place and at that time. For any religious prayer service to be cancelled because it is not safe to go ahead is wrong. It would be wrong if it was a service for the Islamic, Christian, Hindu or Buddhist communities. In Caulfield, where around one in four residents are Jewish, it is obvious that we should not be seeing protests descend on a park outside a synagogue. We saw clashes and fights, spitting and arrests made. This is not what a Friday night should look like anywhere in our state or our nation, let alone in the heart of our Jewish community at the start of Shabbat.

The conflict in the Middle East is causing serious anxiety and distress for our Palestinian, Israeli, Arab, Jewish and Islamic communities. My deepest thoughts are with them at this time. What we do not want to see is that anxiety being compounded by the conflict abroad turning into conflict here at home, and the member for Bentleigh spoke of that previously. In these challenging times we must stand together against attempts to sow the seeds of hate and division in our communities and make sure that our state remains a place where everyone can live harmoniously side by side in peace.

I want to acknowledge that there has been a lot of bipartisan work with the member for Caulfield on this issue, because there should be no partisan divide when it comes to keeping our community safe. Of course our government has provided significant funding to our Jewish community to ensure its safety, security and wellbeing. This includes funding last year of $3 million to combat antisemitism, $900,000 to help fund the Community Security Group’s vital work, $1 million towards a Jewish community safety infrastructure program and more. We have also strengthened legislation to outlaw Nazi hate symbols and salutes, and as the member for Albert Park noted, we are working towards big improvements to the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 to make it easier to prosecute any individual who incites hatred or bigotry based on someone’s religion, race or ethnicity.

I want to take this opportunity to back in the Premier’s calls, as the member for Albert Park did, requesting that all Victorians show love, care and support for one another in these difficult times. It is important to also emphasise how Victorians all have the right to come together and support one another and the right to peaceful protest, but this must not be at the expense of the safety and wellbeing of others. I want to be very clear that the Allan Labor government is not in the business of preventing peaceful protest. There have been almost 90 community rallies involving police presence in recent weeks, and most of them have been completely peaceful. Victoria Police are engaging closely with Victorian Jewish and Islamic community leaders as well as organisers of last Friday’s protest to make sure that they can plan an appropriate response to uphold community safety.

I want to take this moment to thank the Chief Commissioner of Police Shane Patton for all that he is doing to lead this work. He is backed by a strong workforce, with more than $4.5 billion invested in Victoria Police since 2014. We are delivering more than 500 new police officers and 50 protective services officers, which builds on the more than 3000 additional police already on our streets. I remember back in early 2014 when those opposite introduced changes which had the effect of potentially restricting legitimate protests in this state. The once great Liberal Party, the party of Menzies over there, attempted to restrict the rights of everyday Victorians. The coalition’s move-on powers did not apply solely to violent or unlawful protests. Their move-on laws meant the police and PSOs could move on any protests of any kind. Victoria Police do a fantastic job under difficult circumstances every single day to keep us safe, and we give our thanks to them for that. It is vital that police have appropriate power to do their jobs effectively, but these laws simply went too far. They were too heavy-handed. They interfered with the rights of working people to assemble. This side of the chamber will always support the right for Victorians to peacefully protest, and it is frankly disgraceful that today those opposite are shamefully exploiting the Israel–Gaza conflict as an opportunity for political pointscoring.

Our government understand that move-on powers are an important tool of Victoria Police, but we also know that it is really important that these powers strike the right balance. Police can currently tell a person to move on from a public place if they reasonably believe that a person is breaching the peace or likely to do so, putting another person in danger or likely to do so, likely to injure someone or damage property or likely to be a risk to public safety. Police may tell an individual to stay away from the public place for up to 24 hours, and if that individual does not move on or stay away, police can give them an on-the-spot fine or arrest them. In other words, the police have move-on powers, appropriately, where there is a risk to safety or violence.

I want to close my remarks by reiterating that this government is completely committed to protecting our multicultural and multifaith communities from harm and distress in these difficult times. Our diversity is at the very heart of the Victorian success story. We will always stand up for the harmony that is so precious to our state. We do not want to see what happened last Friday night in Caulfield ever happen again. While conflict rages abroad, we must not let it divide us at home. We know that our community is at its strongest when we support each other, and every Victorian must have the right to practise their faith and celebrate their culture without fear.

James NEWBURY (Brighton) (17:30): I rise to speak on the member for Malvern’s matter of public importance:

That this house reaffirms that no Victorian should face harassment on account of their faith, and therefore:

(1) condemns the intimidatory protest held in close proximity to a Caulfield synagogue on 10 November 2023; and

(2) supports the reinstatement of Victoria Police’s full range of move-on and arrest powers.

I rise to speak knowing that over the last 38 days this chamber, this state, this nation and the world have been seeing a level of evil we thought no longer existed, and that at its heart is what has been so difficult to live through for the last 38 days. We have witnessed a level of evil we thought we would only read about in books and learn of from people who have lived through those times. In many cases in this chamber we have had the great fortune to speak to people who have lived through those atrocities and who have passed on those experiences in a way to ensure that we understand what they lived through and that never again anyone should. But we are seeing those evil times again.

On Saturday, after the events in Caulfield occurred, I said that people of good conscience must not remain silent, and that is what this matter of public importance and what the bill that the member for Malvern moved today are actually about. We are seeing a level of evil pervade our way of life in a way that we cannot sit and watch occur. The line that we tolerate in behaviour, the line that we accept in behaviour around us, has moved every day of those 38 days. That is what occurred before the atrocities of the Second World War – the line of what was acceptable was moved, the line of behaviour where someone was dismissed in passing, where businesses were boycotted, where violence erupted, where people were killed, where millions were killed. Sadly, every day over the last 38 days we have seen that line move, and we are no longer the Victoria, the nation and the world that we were before that time. So we as a coalition and the member for Malvern are saying we must stand up and say that we will not tolerate the line of behaviour being moved. We will not tolerate it. That is what this matter of public importance is about. That is what the bill moved by the member for Malvern this morning was about. This speech that I am giving now on the matter of public importance, though to the chamber, is as much a speech to the Premier as it is to anybody else, and I would say to the Premier: Premier – and if I can use the words that the member for Caulfield used earlier – can I plead to you that people of good conscience cannot remain silent. We are seeing incidents in our community that we cannot tolerate and be silent about – we cannot. We must do something, and sadly, at its core much of what we are seeing is genuine hatred towards Jews. Yes, antisemitism is a disease, and it is a growing disease, but this stems from a genuine hatred towards Jews.

There have been a number of speakers who have spoken on this matter on both sides of the chamber who will have been talking to the Jewish community and know what the Jewish people are going through. We cannot talk about the incidents that the Jewish community are experiencing all day, every day – hundreds of occurrences of behaviour that is hate filled, that is calling for the absolute eradication of a people – because those experiences and those incidents are so vile, are so violent. They are occurring to adults, but also to children, and they are so vile they cannot be repeated in public and in this place. I was recently at one of the shules in my community praying with the congregants. One of the mothers came over to me after we had prayed and talked about an incident that had happened to her young daughter, and I cannot bring myself to talk about what she experienced only a week ago. There are a number of members in this place and the Jewish community outside this place who are experiencing this, and the community are saying ‘Please, Victoria, please, Victorian government, do something. Do something to ensure that Jewish people are safe’.

At a time when the community have experienced what they have experienced, they suffered through something that I never thought that I would live to see, and they were the events of last Friday night in Caulfield, which is one block from my electorate and my community – one block away. A level of hate in a good community towards good people, a level of hate that I never thought I would have to see, which I had read about or seen in black-and-white photographs learning as a child – it happened down the road from my community, to friends. People were hiding in their homes. We cannot remain silent. We must not remain silent.

Premier, you have the power – through you, Deputy Speaker – to do something about it. We, on behalf of the community, are calling for a modest amendment to the law to ensure that police have power to keep the community safe before an event occurs. One of the differences, something that was removed from the previous law, is that police no longer have the power to move on someone, a person, that is causing a reasonable apprehension of violence. That power no longer exists. So I would say to the Premier: as you look at the line of behaviour that has been moved both here and around the world, do not accept what you are seeing. We need to acknowledge that much of this hate is being directed at the Jewish community, and that is a fact. There is no equivalence. This hate is being directed by overwhelming majority to the Jewish community, and one small thing we can do is ensure that when that hate manifests itself in a group of people, the police can do something before that hate becomes violence, and that is such a small thing. So I would finish by saying: Premier, please hear my pleas. Please hear the community’s pleas. Please hear the coalition’s pleas. It is a small amendment, and I ask in your good conscience that you hear it.

Daniela DE MARTINO (Monbulk) (17:40): I rise to speak with a heavy heart on the matter of public importance before us here today, and firstly I would like to acknowledge the contributions of every member who has spoken here before me. Everyone has done so with genuine hurt, pain and concern for their communities and the broader community of Victoria. The member for Box Hill’s moving contribution was actually difficult to listen to. Hearing him express how the Melbourne Jewish community is living in fear, which he has never seen before in his lifetime here, was very, very difficult to hear. Victoria, he said, has been such a safe haven, and it was incredibly traumatic and difficult to see antisemitism on our streets.

The member for Bentleigh called out that it was the responsibility of all Victorians to maintain the peace that we have enjoyed here for so very long, and it is our intention – I know the intention of all of us here – for that to continue. We do have a role to play here as representatives of our communities. We have an absolute obligation and responsibility to not inflame further tensions. I share the member’s pride in what our government has achieved: banning the Hakenkreuz and the Nazi salute, and compulsory education on the Holocaust for children in high school so they truly understand it and are not duped into believing that it is some work of fiction because they have seen something on YouTube. These things are important and they matter. They make a tangible difference.

And the member for Caulfield – I would like to make a note of his incredibly heartfelt, passionate and pained contribution. I could hear it in his voice, I could see it in his stance and I unequivocally agree that no Victorian should ever face harassment on account of their faith. At any time or in any place there is simply no excuse for it because a person’s faith is sacred to them. It is their belief system which guides them. It provides them comfort in times of darkness, and it provides them rules to live by. For so many Victorians their faith defines them and shapes their lived experiences. It is deeply personal to each and every person. At no stage and in no scenario should a faith practised by a person subject them to intimidation, harassment or violence. Be they traditional Aboriginal, Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh, Confucian, agnostic, atheist or any of the 135 religions represented in our Victorian community, people should always feel safe to espouse their faith, to practise it without fear, intimidation or harassment. They should be able to travel and worship in their synagogue, their mosque, their temple or their church, freely and safely.

Part of what makes this state so wonderful, as has been mentioned by many, many in here today, is our diversity: the rich tapestry of our cultures, our faiths and our languages. With each wave of immigration the fabric of our society has become stronger, it has become more colourful and it has become more interesting. We are more innovative, more cultured and more skilled for it, and we are truly a global city and state by virtue of the myriad of cultures and faiths represented here. Our government is proud that Victorians come from more than 200 countries, speak 260 languages and, as mentioned, follow 135 different faiths. Nearly half of all Victorians were born overseas or have a parent who was, and I spoke of this in my inaugural speech with great pride. I speak of it now with the same great pride and a fierce determination to see it continue and protected.

The Allan Labor government has endeavoured to ensure all Victorians can enjoy the social, cultural and economic benefits of a diverse society, and I am so proud that as a government we do not attempt to divide our community but instead strive to ensure that people feel safe and supported. I recall when we talked about multiculturalism in Australia decades ago we used the word ‘tolerance’. Tolerance is just an entry point. We have gone far beyond tolerance and tolerating difference in Victoria, because as a government and as a state we have embraced diversity. There is a place in Victoria for all people to belong, but there is no place for violence or intimidation or harassment.

That is why the protest on 10 November was so deeply upsetting. It was something which none of us here ever want to see again in Victoria. Watching it last Friday erupt into violent scenes was distressing enough for those viewing it from the comfort of their own homes. I can only imagine how terrifying it was for the residents of Caulfield, where it all took place, especially those who were in their place of worship, their synagogue on Shabbat, which had to be evacuated. I condemn the violence in that protest, and as our Premier clearly stated, we should not let violence in the Middle East beget violence here on the streets of Melbourne.

I do believe it is important that we note that Free Palestine Melbourne apologised for protesting near the synagogue. The words of that apology were read out before, but I would also like to restate them, where they said:

We apologise … for the protest location that led to the evacuation of the synagogue, for any fear they may have felt and for the cancellation of Shabbat. We should not have gathered at this location. It was never our intention to disrupt or intimidate Jewish worshipers.

I do think it is important to note that there was that apology made, and it is really important to note that following that protest we then saw an incredibly peaceful protest of 45,000 people on the streets of Melbourne who were marching in support of free Palestine. That is how protests should be conducted. They are the kinds of protests we are happy to see – peaceful, constructive, with goodwill. Protests are such an important way for people to express their position to government. They are demonstrations of collective action, and it was here in Melbourne in early 1970 that the largest of the moratorium rallies was held: 53 years ago, 70,000-odd people turned out to protest peacefully against the Vietnam War. They were numbers never previously seen and had a profound effect on shifting the direction of our nation’s policy in that war. I am sure many of us have actually attended a protest ourselves. I know I have, and I am really glad to say that the ones I attended were peaceful. They should never be stifled.

Our police do incredibly good work in managing protests before they even commence, and it is important to note the work that Victoria Police has done to engage with Jewish and Islamic community leaders and rally organisers. There have been 89 community rallies involving police presence, and the vast majority have been peaceful in recent weeks. So I would like to thank our police officers for the work they do. So much occurs in the background to allow for peaceful protests, and they perform an important role. I remember bumping into a few out the front of Parliament who were going there to do their regular management of a protest happening on the steps. We thanked them on their way there, and they said, ‘Oh, that’s very kind of you. Normally we get shouted at.’ Imagine turning up to work every day to always be shouted at, so hats off to them.

With regard to protest, our laws as they stand are fair and balanced. They empower police to maintain public order whilst allowing people to protest peacefully. The member for Albert Park did cover them thoroughly, so in brief I would just like to say that during a protest a police officer can tell a person to move on in circumstances where they are protesting where the person is putting the safety of another person in danger or is likely to do so or is doing something that is likely to injure someone or damage property. Our current move-on powers appropriately target risks to safety. Going beyond these powers, as the opposition calls for today, would stifle people’s democratic right to protest peacefully, which is why we cannot support it. We cannot support their call to return to move-on laws, and there is a reason why those harsh laws were repealed so swiftly by our government when first elected back in 2014 after a four-year period in opposition. It was actually one of the first bills that the then Andrews Labor government introduced into Parliament, to repeal those, and the reasons were that they simply went too far. We have to make sure we strike a balance.

In saying all of that I just would like to pause. I know that I am about to run out of time, so as it draws to a close I would like to unequivocally support the Premier’s call requesting that Victorians show each other love, care and support in difficult times.

Chris CREWTHER (Mornington) (17:50): I rise to speak on the matter of public importance (MPI) submitted by the member for Malvern, which I want to quote.

That this house reaffirms that no Victorian should face harassment on account of their faith, and therefore:

(1) condemns the intimidatory protest held in close proximity to a Caulfield synagogue on 10 November 2023; and

(2) supports the reinstatement of Victoria Police’s full range of move-on and arrest powers.

On this latter point, in 2013 the then Napthine Liberal–Nationals government introduced the Summary Offences and Sentencing Amendment Bill 2013, making important changes the law to better protect the community from lawless behaviour on our streets and to deter violence. The bill, passed in 2014, gave police clearer and more effective move-on powers and the ability to create longer lasting exclusion orders. It extended powers to deal with violent individuals impeding others from accessing a premises, those who had committed a crime in a public place, those causing others to have a reasonable fear of violence or those who were endangering safety or engaging in behaviour that was likely to cause damage to other people’s property. This legislation was not about encroaching upon people’s right to peacefully protest and express their views in a public setting. It was about making it clear that if people wished to go beyond legitimate peaceful communication of their views and instead resort to violence, intimidation and tribalism, police officers would have the power to order those individuals to move on. These laws were very important and calculated to stop individuals engaging in unlawful, intimidatory or disruptive behaviour. These laws were about keeping people safe as well as protecting businesses, workers, Victorian residents and visitors and Victorian economic and social activity from disruption.

Then the Andrews Labor government scrapped this important legislation, which has since and particularly recently not easily enabled the moving on and arrest of those prepared to put people in harm’s way, damage property and intimidate and hurt others. Again, the move-on laws passed by the coalition government in 2014 were about stopping the commission of abuses, not about preventing the exercise of legitimate democratic rights. The Leader of the Opposition when he was debating the Summary Offences Amendment (Move-on Laws) Bill 2015 stated:

Let today’s debate be a marker in time – a time when we warned of the dangerous signals that this bill would send … Law and order is not a cheap quip or the playground of demagogues; it is a responsibility to protect the people we represent.

The Leader of the Opposition’s words are still relevant now, more so than ever. As the Israel–Hamas war rages over 14,000 kilometres away, tensions between pro-Israel, pro-Palestine and other communities in Melbourne and across Australia have reached boiling point. I do not want innocent lives lost on any side in Israel and Gaza, but this matter of public importance goes to what is happening here in Australia, here in Victoria, in response to that conflict. I support the right to peaceful protest on all sides on any debate or issue, but I do not support the right to violent protest; encouraging violence; signs that incite violence, such as were raised before about a sign putting the Star of David in a bin; signs and flags that support proscribed terrorist organisations like Hamas or ISIS; and other activities intended to intimidate and harass. I support retaining public order and the safety of our community.

Recently we have had a senior sporting official calling for members of the Jewish community to be bombed; hate-fuelled violence; clashes between protesters; a cyclist attacked just the other day on a popular Melbourne street while carrying an Israeli flag; a car load of people in Melbourne who were, to quote a passenger, hunting for Jews, as reported in the press; neo-Nazis going through train carriages looking to identify Jews and giving the Nazi salute on an escalator; and just over the weekend, a violent clash in Caulfield after a fire at the local Burgertory restaurant, with police officers having to use pepper spray, and a local synagogue having to evacuate and close its doors on Shabbat and also with the Palestinian CEO of Burgertory having to relocate his wife and young child to a safe house after receiving a death threat saying he would be made a Shahid, an Islamic term for a Muslim martyr.

Noting this MPI, I too condemn the intimidatory protest held in close proximity to a Caulfield synagogue on 10 November 2023. Recently I have been contacted by several Jewish Victorians who are now afraid to go out, afraid of being targeted and afraid for their kids’ safety in our own community – people who are being targeted for their Jewish faith, perhaps more so than ever in Victoria. People are scared. They are being told not to wear identifying school uniforms or their yarmulkes. As reported to me by a Mornington constituent about the Caulfield protest:

Can you imagine those people in their homes, within hearing of what occurred … of what was allowed to occur …

Cars honking, abuse being yelled, one I heard was ‘filthy Jews’!

In Caulfield?? What is out State coming to? … Demand that police can be given the tools to stop this hatred escalation! …

I’m not Jewish, but I’m getting really upset and concerned about the lack of response from Government.

This kind of behaviour targeting others, perpetrated by a handful of hateful and really poor individuals, is not welcome in our state and country. Of course I support the right to protest and to freely communicate one’s views. I believe that in this time of tension, open, honest and legitimate discussions should be allowed for from all, particularly those who are Israeli, Palestinian or otherwise connected to these communities. However, particularly during times of crises, there are opportunistic and angry people who communicate through violence, intimidation and savagery rather than through a peaceful voice, and there are those that support prescribed terrorist organisations like Hamas and ISIS. That is why it is more important than ever to maintain public order and safety in our communities.

The reinstatement of these key move-on powers for Victorian police officers would be a tangible first step in restoring the rule of law in Victoria and safety for Victorians. That is why this MPI is so important, as it supports the reinstatement of Victoria Police’s full range of move-on and arrest powers. The Victorian Labor government unfortunately blocked these critical move-on laws in the bill that the member for Malvern attempted to bring in earlier today, just like we saw a few months ago with the Paul Denyer bill, once again causing issues and delay for those affected. But perhaps, like with the Denyer issue, the Labor government will themselves belatedly bring in their own bill strengthening move-on and arrest laws. But we should not have to wait. With move-on laws we could have prevented the recent clashes between opposing groups, and we can prevent future such clashes.

Keeping fighting and warring groups apart is critical to the safety of our community, faith groups, different ethnicities and each of the protest groups and to stop protests being fuelled or ramped up. It is important to keep the peace. We do not want to wait until people commit assaults or attacks before the police are allowed to take action. We need to be able to separate groups that might harm each other. Police should have the power to move people on and to directly arrest people either engaging in violence or inciting violence or other criminal activity. Such move-on laws would have come in handy with the recent protests and, as mentioned by the member for Caulfield, also earlier in the year when neo-Nazis gatecrashed a women’s rights protest and did the Nazi salute on the steps of Parliament. With move-on laws that incident could have been prevented. More generally, keeping fighting and warring groups apart is critical to the safety of the community and each of the protest groups and to stop protests from escalating into violent clashes. It is important to keep the peace. We do not want to wait until people commit assaults and attacks. Simply put, the police should be empowered to prevent this.

In summary, the Labor government needs to reinstate the full range of move-on and arrest powers. The rule of law is the linchpin of any just and stable society, serving as a guiding light that helps societies and individuals and prevents injustice and the supposed strong overtaking the supposed weak. This MPI and the bill moved by the member for Malvern earlier today would be of great comfort to many Victorians, in particular our Jewish community, who feel afraid right now. Such Victorians would know that their elected MPs and particularly their government were doing all that they could to protect them, and police would not feel as helpless to act under the powers they are currently given but could act when needed to protect Victorians from harm.

It is important that we strike the very delicate balance between maintaining public order while also respecting rights like freedom of movement, association, speech and protest. But with proper move-on and arrest laws and powers, Victorians would be reassured that, in the event of a violent protest, police will have the powers to protect them and to prevent violent incidents. As part of this MPI, it is not only supporting police move-on and arrest powers and condemning the protests near the Caulfield synagogue, but it is also reaffirming via this house that no Victorian should face harassment on account of their faith. As the member for Mornington and as Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Justice and Corrections, I hope that the Assembly therefore fully supports this matter.

Brad ROWSWELL (Sandringham) (18:00): In the 44 seconds remaining I also rise to speak on this matter of public importance to say that it is absolutely essential for this house to agree to what the member for Malvern has put forward – a very sensible, thought-through, considered proposal in this sad time in our state’s history. It is a real shame that earlier today the government had an opportunity to allow the first reading of a bill to reinstate move-on powers in this house and the government, without actually seeing any detail of that bill, denied the opposition that opportunity – denied a principled, thought-through and well-considered proposal by the member for Malvern being considered by this place at a time when our Victorian community needs it most.