Wednesday, 19 November 2025

 David SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (09:33): I move:

That I introduce a bill for an act to amend the Control of Weapons Act 1990 to provide greater powers for police officers to use electronic metal detection devices to search persons for weapons and for other purposes.

This bill would be known as the Control of Weapons Amendment (Establishing Jack’s Law, Use of Electronic Metal Detection Devices) Bill 2025. Every day of delay is another day that risks the lives of Victorians due to knife crime. This is one of the most urgent things that this Parliament should be talking about today.

Jack’s law was created after the tragic stabbing of 17-year-old Jack Beasley on the Gold Coast in 2019. The purpose of this is preventative policing, to provide police with the powers to wand for weapons and to remove knives, machetes and edged weapons off the streets before assaults and robberies occur.

In Queensland, during the first full year of its operation police conducted more than 122,000 scans, seized 1200 weapons and made 3200 arrests. Queensland has made Jack’s law a permanent statewide law. Jack’s law is now in Queensland, New South Wales, Western Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory, but not in Victoria. The Beasley family have been over to the UK, and they are looking at it there, but not in Victoria. The time to act is now. In June Brett Beasley, the father of Jack, met with the Minister for Pollice and urged the police minister to do this. The police minister said that this was a great idea and that they would look at it and look at introducing it.

What has happened? Nothing. Crickets. Zero. In that time we have seen deaths on our streets in Victoria. People have died because this government has done nothing. This government needs to act now. If we had had Jack’s law 15 months ago, when Brett Beasley could have met with the Minister for Police, we would possibly not have seen the deaths of 15-year-old Dau Akueng and 12-year-old Chol Achiek. They should be alive today. They were fatally stabbed at Cobblebank after being ambushed by a group with armed machetes and large knives. Seven offenders aged 15 to 19 have been charged with their murders, exposing the shocking case of youth violence. We have seen this happen again and again. In September we saw it with 18-year-old Kaiden Morgan, who also should be alive today. His life was ended on a residential street in Morwell after a machete attack on 27 September. This tragedy did not have to happen, and with Jack’s law we can ensure young Victorians do not become victims.

This is an opportunity for the government to wake up and do this. We have seen so many knife attacks, and this government thinks the $13 million machete bins are the answer. We cannot wait for the machetes to be handed in. We cannot wait for good Samaritans to do the right thing while people are doing the wrong thing – getting away with carrying these knives on the streets. We have seen it. I know the government is going to stand up and say, ‘There are thousands of knives that have been confiscated.’ In Victoria we have only had 129 knives that have been seized in 12 months. In Queensland there have been a thousand through these Omni operations. These knife searches should be no different than a random breath test.

When you give police the powers to go out, just like we do with drink driving, it ensures that we reduce the road toll and keep people safe on our streets. Why can’t we do the same with knife crime? Why can’t we have the same kinds of powers to stop and scan people to ensure people are safe? The government wants to put PSOs into shopping strips. Give them Jack’s law so they can go out there and proactively search. We do not need to have the police fill in paperwork and wait two weeks before they can do a search in shopping precincts and at train stations. These new powers that we are proposing give designated areas so that people can do this as part of everyday business. Police should be able to do it and PSOs should be able to do it in knife crime hotspots.

Let us not wait for another death. Let us not wait for the government to keep talking big and doing nothing to get dangerous knives off the streets. The government has failed to listen to the Beasley family, who have been pleading for this government to introduce Jack’s law in Victoria. Why reinvent the wheel? Why not do what is working successfully in Queensland here in Victoria? They have talked a big game with adult time for violent crime – what about Jack’s law? Here is a perfect example where you can use Queensland ideas to make Victorian streets safe. If the government were serious about taking knives off the streets, they would look across the border to Queensland and implement it now. I urge the government to bring on this bill now.

 John LISTER (Werribee) (09:39): I thank the member for raising this important issue in this place. I would also like to acknowledge the family and representatives here today. We know – we have been listening on the ground – that it is really important to listen to these experiences but also to make sure that our responses are led by intelligence and data. We do not support the introduction of this bill for the simple reason that we are already working in this space, and later today there will be an opportunity for people to talk about this and the changes that we are making in the context of the Justice Legislation Amendment (Police and Other Matters) Bill 2025. While I do not want to pre-empt debate on this bill, I do just want to mention that there are sections in this bill that go to some of the changes the member for Caulfield raised.

It is important that we give police the powers they need to do their job. Police have that operational independence to make sure that they are doing these kinds of searches based on intelligence, based on the data and based on that coordination between the different units of Victoria Police and the agencies involved.

We do not necessarily need to adopt Jack’s law in the form that the member for Caulfield has raised here today, because we have had this designated area police weapons search scheme for quite some time – since 2009. This was before any other Australian jurisdiction introduced these random, without-warrant-or-suspicion weapons searches of people, using electronic metal detection devices or wands. This scheme allows police and PSOs to search people and vehicles for weapons randomly in a public place within a designated area, without warrant or suspicion.

We discussed in this place earlier in the year changes to the –

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! I would ask members to cease interjecting across the chamber.

Brad Rowswell: On a point of order, Speaker, I believe the member is reading from notes.

The SPEAKER: Is the member reading from notes?

John LISTER: I am referring to notes.

The SPEAKER: He is referring to notes.

John LISTER: I think it is important to refer to notes, because there have been quite a few amendments in this space over the years since 2009 when we led the charge across all jurisdictions to have these random searches in designated places. It is important that we have made these changes –and I will refer to my notes here, for the member – in 2010 and also recently in 2025, and those changes came into force on 26 March this year. And we have already seen the effects of these changes here: 15,000 weapons seized by Victoria Police, the most in any jurisdiction. We have also announced this week that we will procure an additional 842 hand metal detectors as part of the changes announced with the reforms that the Chief Commissioner of Police has spoken about – getting our PSOs out into different parts of the community and expanding what they can do.

I know this is working. Since 26 March we have seen numerous operations, particularly in my community in Wyndham. We saw an operation – I will have to confirm the date, referring to my notes here, for the member opposite – on 3 July. We had Operation Omni operate at Werribee plaza in response to concerns and intelligence that there were issues there. 450 people were searched at that designated area over the time that they were there; 50 personnel from across multiple units were involved, and it is important to see that we already have changes that have been made that are in effect being driven by Victoria Police. We always have to respect that operational decision-making that is independent from politics, and that is why what we will be discussing later today – not to pre-empt debate – with the Justice Legislation Amendment (Police and Other Matters) Bill 2025 does go to those spaces. To keep it very broad, there will be changes to the way that those declarations are planned. Search notices will no longer have to be physical, so the photocopier at Werribee police station will get a bit of a break. They can have a QR code that they can serve on that person so they understand why they are being searched and what their rights are around that, which is particularly important when we are looking at some of the vulnerable communities that may get caught up in these searches.

Since we made these amendments earlier in the year, building on the strong changes that we have had in this space, we have also seen operations at Werribee train station and at our bus interchanges across the western suburbs. This is intelligence-led policing, and we need to make sure that we give the police the powers they need to do their job. Wait till later today – you will see on our little green sheet that we are debating it.

 Brad BATTIN (Berwick) (09:44): I rise to support the member for Caulfield’s position here with introducing a bill in relation to knife laws here in Victoria. Can I say first of all, one of the things that is probably a misnomer, and we are hearing from the other side about it, is this is not about searches; this is about stop and scan. This is a not-intrusive way that we can actually take knives off the street that is not offensive and that gives the police the powers and the opportunities to use a small, hand-held scanner to ensure that knives can come off the streets.

John Lister interjected.

Brad BATTIN: I did not interrupt you, member for Werribee, not once. So if you would do me a favour –

The SPEAKER: Member for Berwick, through the Chair.

Brad BATTIN: Through the Chair, and stop complaining about your constituents who are whingeing about crime and actually put on record –

The SPEAKER: Through the Chair, not to the member for Werribee.

Brad BATTIN: What we did not hear from that side at all was that we have actually heard that this could be called Jack’s law because of Jack Beasley. I have met with and spoken with Brett Beasley about the tragic circumstances of losing his son at just 17 years old. But it could be called Dau’s law. It could be called Chol’s law.

These are victims here in Victoria. These are young boys who were on their way home from a basketball game. Do I think it would have stopped those crimes? I do not know, but it may have, and it may have taken the knives off the street.

These laws have been in place for a period of time in Queensland. Down here in Victoria we have heard about people like Ash Gordon, who was stabbed to death. We have heard about up to 25 young men under the age of 25 on the streets of Victoria. We saw an innocent victim get stabbed in the chest walking through Melbourne. If that is not a reason to change the laws here in our state, then I do not know what is. All we are asking for is for once the government to stop patting themselves on the back for what they are doing and look at the reality of the crimes that are still happening here in Victoria. They will continue to happen until you make change.

Sometimes in this job – and trust me, I know it more than many right at the moment – you have to put your pride aside. The problem is the Victorian Labor Party will not do it. Not once will they accept the knowledge from this side of the chamber that we can make change. To say it is about separation of powers – this motion is to introduce legislation to give the police the powers they need and the protection they need so they can go and stop and scan. It has nothing to do with us directing the Chief Commissioner of Police what to do. Otherwise you would not bother having the Victoria Police Act 2013, and that is what is in place so that Victoria Police can operate independently. We would not bother having the Sentencing Act 1991. We would not bother having anything to protect Victoria Police. But the reality is we need to. Why – because crime in Victoria is at record levels. It is at a stage where people are emailing me and, I know, my colleagues here and saying they have fear their own homes. I know the other side they keep telling me that is just not the case. I do not know who checks their emails then, because I can guarantee you that many of us in this place have received emails where every single one of us has got the same email. It comes through and says, ‘I have genuine fear because of the things that have happened here on the streets in Melbourne.’

This legislation is urgent. It is not actually a request; in my view this is a demand. This needs to go through this Parliament. I caught up with Brett last night across at the Imperial, and we had a chat. When you speak to someone and you look them in the eye and you ask them, ‘Why do you bother travelling to every other state? Why do you bother travelling to England?’ it is because he wants to make change. We all know the power of one can make a huge difference. Can I congratulate the Beasley family on what they have done in Queensland under David Crisafulli and with Chris Minns in New South Wales, and they have gone into South Australia. But the thing here is this government will not even meet with him. In the one meeting they had they made commitment after commitment, but now they will not respond to an email or a call. When the Premier got on Sunrise and said, ‘I’m not sure what you’re talking about,’ and it was only moments after Brett Beasley had been on talking about the fact that he had lost his son, it was the uttermost, highest level of disrespect that I have seen for a person who is fighting for something that is just right. He is not fighting for anything else. He is not fighting for a pat on the back.

I just say to the government: if you do not want to trust Brett, that is fine. If you do not want to trust a Queenslander, sometimes we can live with that too. But listen to those families that have lost kids here in Victoria. When the member for Morwell gets up and he tells you about the families down his way, take your time to go and sit with them and explain to them why Victoria Police do not have the powers to stop and scan and get knives off the streets in Victoria.

 Josh BULL (Sunbury) (09:49): In rising this morning to oppose the member for Caulfield’s position I want to take the opportunity, as I did in yesterday’s debate, to acknowledge those victims, communities, families, friends, loved ones and those who have been hurt and harmed by violent offenders and, in doing so, make the observation and the point around the government’s position on these matters.

I think, as was pointed out yesterday by members on this side and members on the other side as well, these matters should be beyond party politics. We know and understand, as I made comments to yesterday around the work of retail staff, of hospo staff and of those that work in fast food, the damage, the hurt and the pain that is caused by these crimes.

The position of the government that was articulated last week by the Premier, the range of measures that have been taken, particularly through this place, and the announcements of last week made by the Premier, the Minister for Police, the Attorney-General and others go to this very important work. As I said at the start, there should be no contest when it comes to looking after local communities. There should be no contest when it comes to making sure that we are supporting victims and their families, and I made some references in yesterday’s debate about these circumstances – being able to, certainly from my working background, see in a retail setting the damage and the harm that is done to staff when violence occurs and the prolonged and sustained trauma that occurs in any of these circumstances.

The work that has been done by VicPol, the references that have been made in these matters by Victoria Police, indeed the work that goes to the more than 15,000 seizures and the designated search areas and the references that were made by the member for Werribee in his contribution just a short time ago go to the work that will be done – being careful, of course, not to pre-empt debate on further matters, which go to the circumstances that the member for Caulfield has raised. There is indeed an obligation and a profound sense of responsibility that we all have in this place when it comes to community safety. Our position, which has been articulated very clearly, as I mentioned earlier, goes to working very closely with Victoria Police and the advice provided by the Chief Commissioner of Police.

I do want to take in the short time remaining the opportunity to thank for their work Victoria Police. The matters that they deal with each and every day when putting themselves on the front line for the protection of our communities is something that we need to always respect and admire, and we do so with the understanding and the knowledge, as we have seen particularly in recent times, that crime, like so many things within our communities, does evolve and does change. The position of the government remains the same, and that is taking the advice of the chief commissioner, listening to victims and those that are harmed by circumstances and to their families and making sure that we have the settings in place to be able to deal with these matters in an appropriate way – and doing so where we are not cutting across many of those processes that I think all members of this house support when it comes to the separation of powers. Making sure that these circumstances are dealt with in the appropriate way at all times is the focus of the government.

 Martin CAMERON (Morwell) (09:54): I rise to fully support the member for Caulfield’s motion here today. May I say that I will deal in facts. Unfortunately the hard and harsh facts are that because individuals carry knives on our streets people are losing their lives. That is the bottom line. It is costing people their lives – mums and dads that have to go and bury their children that are hunted down on the street and not just stabbed once, stabbed multiple times.

These people that are carrying knives do not care. They face no consequences. The government has constantly in the last two weeks talked about consequences. They face no consequences at the moment. Jack’s law will more than likely stop it in its tracks. If we can give the police the powers and the wands so that every single police officer and PSO can carry a wand and stop and search someone, that is going to go a long way to protecting the community.

I walk down the streets, whether it be here in Melbourne or in regional Victoria, and I have got my wits about me, looking around to see who is about me, who is following me, if there is someone, and what is going on over on the other street corner, because I know probably that person or those people over there will be carrying weapons which will put our lives in jeopardy.

I sit with the family of Dr Ash Gordon constantly, have a chat with them and talk about life and how they have daily reminders and questions about why their son was stabbed multiple times out on the street defending his property. I feel that if the government were fair dinkum about introducing laws to protect us, they would sit down with the Gordon family. They would sit down with the family of Kaiden Morgan-Johnston, look them in the eye and feel their hurt. And I think the government would have an about-face and bring these laws in to protect the community.

We bend over and try our best to look after the minority in this state. The fact is: if you do not want to be wanded and found to be carrying a weapon, do not carry it. Why should people in this state be able to walk around with a knife and think that they should be protected? Enough is enough. Too many lives have been lost. I do not want a family member of mine to be the next victim. I do not want someone in this chamber saying we should have done more because that is their family member.

We have an opportunity today to work together to stop what is going on, and I do not think anyone in this chamber can say that Jack’s law is not the way to go. Put an end to it. Look after the people that are doing the right thing. And for those that are carrying weapons to harass, chase down, and murder people on our streets: stop it. They should not have the right to be able to do that. There need to be hard consequences in this state of Victoria, and we need to make a statement now. The opportunity is there with this law that the member for Caulfield has put up. We have the data; we have people being killed or injured on our streets. I reckon if we gave wands to police and PSOs and they walked down the CBD of Melbourne today, we would be astounded at how many people were carrying knives, and that also happens right over regional Victoria. So I fully concur with the member for Caulfield, and I think everybody does in this chamber. We need change. We need a law to protect us. You should not be able to carry weapons in Victoria.

 Daniela DE MARTINO (Monbulk) (09:59): Before I commence I would like to acknowledge that there are many people who feel very passionately about this. I have just heard my friend on the other side of the chamber the member for Morwell, who I have a lot of time for, speak obviously with real passion, as well as the members for Werribee, Sunbury, Berwick and Caulfield – all those in the chamber today. No-one wants to see anyone a victim of crime – no-one in the state of Victoria, no-one in this house, no-one in the other place at all – because we know the impact that crime has on people. I do want to extend my deepest sympathies to the family of Jack and to the families and the victims who are survivors still, who have been on the end of terrible, horrific violent crime.

As I say, none of us want to see it. None of us in government want to see it, which is why we have introduced a suite of reforms. There has been a comprehensive, cascading set of legislation that we have been working on very closely in consultation with Victoria Police and with key stakeholders, and it is undeniable that we have introduced significant legislation when it comes to curtailing crime. But in particular, when we talk about Jack’s law, I think it is important to note that Victoria Police have had the power since 2009 to actually have the police weapons search scheme under the Control of Weapons Act 1990. That was before any other Australian jurisdiction came even close. And we have expanded that further this year. Our scheme allows police and protective services officers to search people and vehicles for weapons randomly in a public place, within a designated area, without warrant or suspicion, and all designated area weapons searches must commence by police and PSOs using electronic metal detection devices. There are two forms of designated areas: planned and unplanned. There were some amendments made to the scheme in 2010, but really significant ones were made this year as part of our response to crime – because as I say once again, none of us here, none of us in this place, none of us in Victoria, want to see crime happening. But we have adequate powers already in place. Even yesterday we introduced –

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Members will show respect for the member on their feet.

Daniela DE MARTINO: further powers when it comes to retail and when it comes to fast food, hospitality and transport workers. We introduced legislation yesterday which will come into effect from the day of royal assent. I am very pleased those opposite are not opposing that legislation; it would be good to see it carried through.

Workplace protection orders will be coming in next year, and that is incredibly important, especially to retailers, former retailers like me and others out there who have experienced terrible crime as well. The machete ban that we brought in – the first jurisdiction in the nation – actually resulted in Amazon ensuring that they did not allow machetes anywhere else into this country because of Victoria and what we did here.

Our amnesty bins have seen 7000 machetes dropped into them. I will make the comment that some on the other side and in the other place wanted to actually undermine that scheme and tried to break into one. That is just a terrible thing to do. What signal does that send to the public? Fifteen thousand knives have been seized in the last year; in the year prior it was 14,000 and in the year prior to that it was 12,000. We are seeing an effect out there. VicPol are doing the work. Those officers deserve all the support of all of us in here. Every time they don their uniform it is an act of courage, and the work that we have done in the legislation we have produced has been in consultation with Victoria Police. We are doing everything we can here. We will be opposing that bill.

 Ellen SANDELL (Melbourne) (10:04): By leave, I just want to say a few words about the way the Greens will be voting on this one. It is an important principle that members who are not ministers – crossbench members, opposition members – should be able to introduce and first read bills. That is a principle that we support, and so ordinarily we would support the first reading of a bill. But it needs to come with some notice, and we were not given any notice. That is a common courtesy – to give crossbench members some notice when bringing –

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: I would ask you to show some respect to the member on their feet.

Ellen SANDELL: It is a common courtesy for members who are bringing bills to this place to give other members some notice.

On the substance of this bill, we also cannot support it. On the subject of this bill, this is a really important issue. When we are talking about crime and safety, everyone deserves to feel safe in our community. It is a basic human need. But I do not think our community is well served by grandstanding and reactionary, panicked politics.

We should be looking to the evidence of what reduces crime and what increases community safety and not policies that are designed to look tough but do not address the root causes of crime, and especially we should not be introducing policies into Victoria that we know will have a disproportionate negative impact on vulnerable communities. Policies like this can often be misused with young people of colour being disproportionately targeted unfairly. This happens in my electorate. A large proportionate of my electorate are young people of colour who are from African Australian populations and have been disproportionately targeted by the police in the past, and giving the police more powers to do that I think cannot come without some serious scrutiny and safeguards.

I note that Labor is also not supporting this bill today, and I very much hope that we do not see the Labor Party turn around and do a 180 later on in response to pressure and Herald Sun headlines. We need to look at evidence. When it comes to community safety we need to do what actually works, not introduce panicked policies to cynically win votes off the back of community fear. Let us be clear on what is happening here. This is all about politics, not about community safety. I think if we actually cared about community safety, we would be having a serious conversation about it rather than bringing in a bill, with no notice, to this house that is based on reactionary politics. That is why we will not be supporting it.

Assembly divided on motion:

The SPEAKER: The Minister for Police and the member for Caulfield can leave the chamber for half an hour. Wait at the doors until the division is completed.

Motion defeated.

Minister for Police and member for Caulfield withdrew from chamber.