Wednesday, 19 February 2020

Bills

Justice Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2019

Second reading

Debate resumed.

Mr TAYLOR (Bayswater) (16:01): It is fantastic to see the member for Oakleigh in the chamber.

Mr Dimopoulos interjected.

Mr TAYLOR: Thank you very much, member for Oakleigh. I know he also provided a significant contribution on this piece of legislation today. No doubt there will be many, many people in his electorate that will also benefit from the positive outcomes that this bill will deliver.

I have given a summary of the bill, and I will get back to where I left off. This bill goes to directly supporting and backing in our workers, not just across the Bayswater electorate but right across this fantastic state. We have an extremely strong record of doing exactly that, with this legislation and everything we do in this place and everything that this Andrews government has delivered for Victorians.

We talk about this legislation and what it will deliver and what will change. We saw recently of course with the sad passing of John Cain, the former great Premier of this state of Victoria, the legacy he left behind, part of which was the creation of WorkSafe, along with his many other legacies, whether it be in the creation of the Transport Accident Commission or the Victorian Electoral Commission. The work that this bill continues to build on started with John Cain and will continue in terms of making sure that we continue to back in our workers and make sure that we empower them to hold people accountable where wrongs have been done against them.

This bill talks about empowering workers to bring up class actions and making it easier for them to do so. We talk about potential class actions around silicosis and around wage theft, and in relation to silicosis we have learnt much about this insidious disease and the way that it has devastated the lives of workers, their families and their communities. Without any delay this government has acted decisively by banning the dry cutting of engineered stone to protect workers from the deadly silica dust. New regulations will dramatically cut workers’ exposure to the crystalline silica and reduce their likelihood of developing the awful disease. In addition, the government has developed a silica action plan to stamp out this debilitating disease. The plan includes free health screenings for Victoria’s 1400 stonemasons and a compliance blitz of high-risk workplaces.

We have too now seen a rise in the practice of wage theft by those who choose to dud their employees, shamefully. We have now heard in this place and of course across the media and a number of other platforms the stories recently of the millions of dollars of unpaid wages and workplaces where staff sadly are often left with minimal rights and in many instances are even too scared to speak out through fear of being fired or otherwise. So this government has also committed to passing laws to criminalise wage theft, which now appears to be all too common in our hospitality industry. Employers who underpay their workers need to and must be held to account.

These are important reforms in areas affecting everyday Victorians. But the government wants to use all the tools at its disposal to support workers and consumers, and our class action laws that we are discussing in this place today can go a long way—and will go a long way—towards making sure that we support those workers.

We are also supporting workers with our guaranteed apprentices on major government infrastructure projects and with our free TAFE courses across over 40 priority course areas, including, as we have discussed in the most recent matter of public importance, early childhood education. Those will be coming online this year as we start to roll out a significantly important piece of work in three-year-old kinder right across Victoria, with a close to $1 billion investment in last year’s budget. No doubt that investment will continue, because we know the great benefits that has for three-year-olds as they continue education throughout the rest of their life. That is a landmark reform, which will transform education in this state and support jobs for early childhood workers.

Significantly, this continues to support workers, it just builds on the track record of the Andrews Labor government in its second term in supporting everyday workers—empowering them and making sure that we continue to turn that balance of power, we give that power to employees and we make sure employers do not wantonly disregard legislation and do not just get away with stealing wages and not providing safe workplaces. This will go a long way to doing that. Our reforms to class actions are a strong continuation of our work in continuing to back in workers and empowering them to stand up against wrongdoings.

Class actions are an important tool in our justice system as they allow a case with six or more plaintiffs to combine their action. These class actions allow people who have been harmed to access the courts and get the damages they rightly deserve. We know that Victoria’s class action laws are now currently extremely under-utilised. This is what the Victorian Law Reform Commission found in its 2018 report Access to Justice: Litigation Funding and Group Proceedings. In an average year only five class actions are filed with the Supreme Court because it can be hard to find a person to act as a lead or representative plaintiff on behalf of a group of claimants. Plaintiffs fear that they will face the burden of legal costs if the matter is unsuccessful because they might be made personally liable for meeting the costs of the other side. This acts as a major deterrent, as we know, to ordinary people, to everyday people off the street, who have had wrongs done against them.

We need to make sure that people are able to bring more cases against big corporations and that our laws can be improved so that more Victorians can gain access to fair and righteous justice. In some cases, of course, the risk can be addressed by a law practice acting on a no win, no fee basis, as we have seen—and I am sure we have all seen the ads—or through the involvement of a litigation funder. However, where this is not the case the risk of personal liability may act as a major barrier to bringing a class action.

This bill will allow lawyers to receive a fee that is calculated as a percentage of the settlement of damages. This is achieved by enabling the Supreme Court to make what is called a group costs order. This will shift the burden of cost risks from the lead plaintiff to the plaintiff’s lawyers in return for the lawyers receiving a percentage of any amount recovered as payment of their costs. Of course under these new group costs orders, and consistent with the law reform commission’s recommendations, lawyers would be required to indemnify the lead plaintiff for any adverse costs orders and provide for security costs if required.

Many in the legal profession support this bill as an access to justice measure, whether it is the Law Institute of Victoria’s then president, Stuart Webb, the Victorian president of the Australian Lawyers Alliance, Jeremy King, the Consumer Action Law Centre, the Consumer Action Law Centre’s chief executive officer—the list goes on and on and on. This is good reform, this is good legislation, and it will allow the court to vary an order, including the percentage amount for legal costs, at any time during the proceedings.

There are some minor and technical amendments, albeit extremely important, which continue to strengthen our legislative framework when it comes to equal and accessible justice and around some of the acts, including the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 to clarify when a witness is cognitively impaired. We are amending the Criminal Procedure Act and we are amending the Evidence Act 2008 as well as making some other minor amendments. This bill, as I have said, is a significant piece of legislation. It will make sure that we continue to empower workers to stand up against wrongdoings, to stand up where something has happened and we know that it is wrong, and by allowing more people to access class actions, and that is exactly what we are doing. This Andrews government, as we know, will always stand up for workers. We will always back them in, not just in Bayswater but right across Victoria, and I commend this bill to the house.

Ms RICHARDS (Cranbourne) (16:09): I rise with great pleasure and am honoured to follow on from the member for Bayswater and his contribution on the Justice Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2019. The contributions from this side of the house have been outstanding, and I reflect on the lived experience as well as the professional experience of so many of the contributions that have come before me, starting with the member for Frankston, an emergency worker, firefighter and educator who brings a passion to this place, and the many inspirational and deep-thinking lawyers, including the Acting Speaker now, the member for Carrum. I reflect on the member for Clarinda and the way that he also acknowledged the multicultural communities in his area, and the never forgettable member for Burwood. I would also like to thank the Attorney-General for bringing this reform to us here, the person who does the deep policy work, ably assisted by her unique advisers and departmental staff who have a passion for legal justice.

I commend this legislation because of course it importantly responds to recommendation 8 of the Victorian Law Reform Commission report that did consider access to justice litigation. On this side of the house, when we have the opportunity to have the great honour and privilege of government, we follow evidence-based approaches, and of course this legislation before us today is based on some very clear and compelling evidence.

This bill amends the Supreme Court Act 1986 and other justice-related acts that were so clearly articulated by the member for Bayswater, and these class actions that this encourages or allows are important tools that help bring about justice. I am grateful to Stuart Price, as the CEO of the Litigation Lending Services, for his clarity and research, as was articulated in the Australian where he explained:

Of the five largest class action awards ever made in Australia, none were shareholder claims.

He goes on to say that members of these class actions were ordinary people who were only able to access justice because they were able to find somebody willing to shoulder the financial risk. Of course that is where we have taken action. We have recognised that it is not always possible to find a person willing to take on that financial risk, nor is it feasible when the costs are prohibitive and the risk is so high. These changes will allow lawyers to indemnify the lead plaintiff to remove the fear and risk of adverse costs if the class action is unsuccessful. I also note that Ben Hardwick from Slater and Gordon—and I am grateful for his insight as well—was reported in the Australian as saying that class actions play an integral role in holding corporations to account and protecting everyday consumers who would otherwise not have the means to bring litigation alone.

I am so proud that Labor has taken notice of these recommendations and listened to this clear public policy. I am pleased to learn that this reform was welcomed by the Law Institute of Victoria and I am aware that Stuart Webb is reported as saying that it would increase access to justice. I note Victoria is now seen as being on the right side of history once again in moving forward with this change, ensuring Victoria is, as always, a pioneer in allowing more of these class actions to proceed.

This legislation is particularly important to Cranbourne. I know that I was always going to be able to bring in the importance of this legislation to the community I represent. I would like to acknowledge that there are many Afghan Australians in Cranbourne, and I would like to thank Ahmed Sabiri, who is the treasurer of the Victorian Afghan Associations Network, for organising a really important information session on the importance of workplace safety. Everyone has a right to feel safe at work, and I commend this organisation for organising an event on a Sunday evening in Lynbrook, where we learnt about the importance of the Afghan community. Of course there are 9000, of the 300 000 residents in my local government area, of Afghan heritage. Many have faced hardships that are hard to imagine, and these have included sacrifices in the pursuit of a better and new life for themselves and their families.

Of course the cornerstone of success is employment. I am aware that people from some of our diaspora multicultural communities are always at some risk of being more vulnerable in the workplace and that the personal costs associated with the harm, including from wage theft and silicosis, is unacceptable. Our government has been very conscious that the pursuit of employment ought not come at the cost of a worker’s health and safety. Losing a loved one, especially a breadwinner but any loved one, is devastating and unacceptable. But I am relieved that we have acted to ban dry cutting of engineered stone and put in place important frameworks to make this practice safer. I do know that many of our communities in Cranbourne, especially our Afghan communities, are people employed in professions that put them at risk of inhaling fine particles of silica dust.

We do know that on average in 2018–19 there was one silica related claim in Victoria every week, and that is unacceptable. The reality is there are too many people who are suffering, and I am proud that we have provided information on this important reform in languages other than English, including in Dari.

I would like to again acknowledge the death of a young man in Cranbourne. Dillon Wu was a 20-year-old boilermaker apprentice. I would like to acknowledge and pay my respects to his family for the pain that they have suffered. His family are constituents of mine in Cranbourne. I would also like to acknowledge Kerty Godon, who was a friend and workmate of Dillon’s who came to see me and told me about the cost to the whole community at the loss of a very young man only two weeks into his role. I would like to thank the AMWU for the extraordinary work they did in responding to this awful death, and again pass on my thanks to Tony Mavromatis for the extraordinary work that his union has done in making workplaces safer for workers across Victoria, right to the centre of our public policy, and making sure that we are always aware of these costs. Wage justice is at the centre of our Labor agenda. A fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work is a simple concept and one that is incredibly important to us all. We need to be safe at work, we need to be paid fairly, and when people rip off workers they ought be held to account.

Last night I was very pleased to have the opportunity to discuss some of the reforms of this government, including this bill that is before us here, with Troy Gray, the secretary of the Electrical Trades Union, and some of the other organisers and delegates from the ETU. I would like to thank Matt Boyd, one of the really hardworking electricians who has been going out to sites across Victoria. He told me some alarming stories about situations that he is coming across. He goes out to make sure that his workers are safe, and he is finding examples of extraordinary practices. It is only from the work of our hardworking trade union sisters and brothers that so many of these issues are brought to our attention and brought to the fore. So I would like to add again my thanks to the Trades Hall Council, to Luke Hilakari, for always reminding us that, whether it is industrial manslaughter legislation, whether it is coming and providing information about the risks of silicosis, whether it is making sure that class actions are easy to access or actually, like we did in passing—finally—yesterday reforms that give line workers licensing; people who go to work in the morning expect the Labor government to make sure that with every reform we do we have a lens that is conscious of the effect that it has across our community. Of course I wish this legislation a speedy passage. We have fought hard for this reform over a long period of time, and I thank everyone here for their support.

Mr McGUIRE (Broadmeadows) (16:19): This bill delivers access to justice for everyday Victorians. I think this is the critical point that is being delivered. It makes it easier to bring class actions across a whole range of concerns, from silicosis to wage theft, to consumer harm and other wrongdoing that occurs, for people who do not have the opportunity to mount a case on their own. It paves the way for class actions to proceed where they otherwise would not be viable because of the financial risk to plaintiffs in legal costs. This is a critical proposition for people getting access to justice.

In relation to silicosis I do want to commend the government, the Attorney-General, the cabinet and everybody involved right through the party, and the union movement, who have acted decisively by banning the dry cutting of engineered stone to protect workers from deadly silica dust. These new regulations will dramatically cut workers’ exposure to crystalline silica and reduce their likelihood of developing silicosis. In addition, the government has developed a silica action plan to stamp out this debilitating disease. This plan includes free health screenings for Victoria’s 1400 stonemasons and a compliance blitz on high-risk workplaces. So this is a really important initiative in prevention and to actually address this significant problem.

I want to also raise, in the spirit of this legislation, something that I have noted just from my personal observation. Near my electorate office there is a nail salon. I have passed it, particularly on Friday evenings, when the place is full, and I can tell you the smell of the chemicals that emanate from there will clear your sinuses from 30 paces. It is in an area where there are a lot of migrant women. Particularly in my electorate I have got virtually the United Nations in one neighbourhood. Every time I have inquired about what actually is going on there, people seem to be defensive. I would like to again put this on the record in the Parliament that I think this is an area that needs to actually be looked at. I am just hoping that the people who work in these nail salons are not being exploited. They are overwhelmingly women, and I just hope that this does not become the next version of the silica problem. I just want to put that on the record with the Attorney-General as well in terms of how we take care of the vulnerable in our communities, and as I said, particularly migrant women, who are some of our most vulnerable.

With this bill the government has also committed to passing laws to criminalise wage theft. We have seen that right through the media in recent times—the different cases and how that is playing out—particularly in our hospitality industry, which has been the focus of high-profile stories and media coverage in the last couple of weeks. The bill also addresses employers who underpay their workers and how that can have greater scrutiny, accountability and compliance. So these are important reforms in areas affecting everyday Victorians, and the government wants to use all the tools at its disposal to support workers and consumers. Our class action laws can go a long way towards delivering this result.

Within our criminal justice system class action cases allow a case with six or more plaintiffs to combine their action, and they provide people who have been harmed access to courts to then get the damages that they deserve. In the past Victoria’s class action laws have been under-utilised. This is what the Victorian Law Reform Commission found in its 2018 report Access to Justice: Litigation Funding and Group Proceedings: in an average year only five class actions are filed in the Supreme Court. So those numbers tell the story.

It can be hard to find a person to act as the lead or representative plaintiff on behalf of a group of claimants. Plaintiffs fear that they will face the burden of legal costs if the matter is unsuccessful because they might be made personally liable for meeting the costs of the other side—so what this bill will do is address this imbalance in the scales of justice—and this acts as a major deterrent to ordinary people bringing cases against big corporations. So this is an improvement in the law so that Victorians can gain greater access to justice. In some cases the risk can be addressed by a law practice acting on a ‘no win, no fee’ basis, and we have seen those advertised, or through the involvement of a litigation funder. From my investigations into that sector, that can be beneficial in some ways but problematic in others as well. However, where that is not the case, the risk of personal liability may act as a major barrier to bringing a class action, so this is an attempt to address this critical gap and to make access more available to more people.

The law reform commission found that allowing lawyers to charge a percentage of the settlement amount in return for indemnifying the lead plaintiff for the other side’s costs lowers the risk for a potential lead plaintiff. So the bill allows lawyers to receive a fee that is calculated as a percentage of the settlement of damages, and this is achieved by enabling the Supreme Court to make what it calls group costs orders. This will shift the burden of costs risk from the lead plaintiff to the plaintiff lawyers in return for the lawyers receiving a percentage of any amount recovered as payment of their costs. So under these new group costs orders, and consistent with the law reform commission’s recommendations, lawyers would be required to indemnify the lead plaintiff for any adverse costs orders and provide security for costs if ordered. Many in the legal profession support this bill as a greater access to justice mechanism. The Law Institute of Victoria’s then president Stuart Webb has stated:

Enabling the Supreme Court to make group costs orders in class actions will mean that plaintiffs will bear a lower costs risk burden, and may facilitate the bringing of meritorious class actions which might not otherwise have been brought in the face of higher costs risks.

I also do want to cite the Consumer Action Law Centre response to this, and their commentary was that:

The Justice Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2019 … will reduce barriers to class actions by allowing lawyers to receive a ‘contingency fee’, a fee that is calculated as a percentage of the settlement of damages.

And just to quote their chief executive, Gerard Brody:

Too often class actions do not proceed because the economics don’t stack up for litigation funders …

This is the point I am making about the system as it stands.

And regulators and other dispute forums, while important aspects of an effective justice system, can’t respond to all misconduct.

And that is the reality of what happens. A lot of injustices are just let go because it is either too difficult or too costly or the risks are too high. I want to quote Gerard Brody again. He says:

The changes in this bill should mean that more class actions are able to proceed. We see so much misconduct affecting vulnerable people by businesses such as payday lenders, debt management firms and even energy companies and telcos. Too often, significant harm goes unremedied.

This is the critical point. He noted that court oversight over class actions is integral for fair results and that:

Class actions relating to junk add-on insurances, a problem initially identified by community legal centres and scrutinised by the Financial Services Royal Commission, are now being settled. It’s important that the fees involved in these actions are fair, and steps are taken to ensure that all affected people benefit.

That is at the heart of this legislation. This is why it will deliver greater access to justice and fairer results, and on this basis I commend the bill to the house.

Mr FREGON (Mount Waverley) (16:28): I rise to speak on the Justice Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2019. I would like to just start by mentioning a couple of my colleagues who mentioned a few things I would like to point out. Firstly, the member for Frankston—I do not think I have ever heard anyone mention Better Call Saul in Parliament before, so that was a nice little thing. His comments on the reasoned amendment that is before us I believe were summed up, if I can paraphrase, by it being more of an ‘unreasonable amendment’. He also spoke about the wages that were stolen from Indigenous Australians in Queensland.

I think we are seeing more and more companies coming out in the news. I think there was even one today, which I will not name, putting themselves out there that they have not paid people what they should have paid people. I can only imagine that they are doing this on the basis that they know that there are wage theft laws coming and they are probably better off saying it now. This is something our government is committed to, and I think these changes in regard to our class action laws are part of what will hopefully mean our big corporations act in a more dutiful and better way so they are actually paying their staff proper amounts.

I also want to point out that my good colleague and neighbour, the member for Burwood, pointed out that the member for Ovens Valley seemed to comment ‘on a diverse range of views’, I think was the statement. I guess, go figure—this is the house for a diverse range of views, so that is not a particular surprise. I must admit that most of the time when we wait for the members on the other side to stand we sort of know, really—you get a sense that you know already—what they are going to say. The member for Burwood and I coined the phrase before: it is like ‘pre-ja vu’.

I think the cornerstone of our legal system is that every person has fair and open access to seek the justice that they deserve. But lawyers are expensive, and very experienced lawyers are very expensive. We do not all have a retired QC who comes and knocks on our door and offers to take us to the High Court and look after us, Mr Kerrigan-style, so this bill makes it more possible for our everyday Joe and Joanne to get the access to justice that they deserve. So I thank the Attorney-General for her hard work in relation to this important bill. The government has made and will continue to make significant reforms in areas which affect everyday Victorians in regard to regulations to protect workers from silicosis and stamping out wage theft as well. We will use all avenues to support and protect our workers and consumers, including updating our class action laws, which we are here to do today.

I would also like to thank our previous Attorney-General for his work in asking the Victorian Law Reform Commission to inquire into access to the law with regard to class actions. That request for that review, which was commenced in 2016, has set us down a path which has brought us here to this bill today. In amending the Supreme Court Act 1986—which, by the way, was a very good year, and my old Jag that is gone now was an ‘86 series 3, a very nice car; I miss it very much—this bill gives rise to recommendation 8 of the Victorian Law Reform Commission’s Access to Justice: Litigation Funding and Group Proceedings report of March 2018. There is a mouthful.

While I am on that, a quick note of thanks for the lifelong service of the late Honourable Philip Cummins, AM, who was chair of the commission at the time. His distinguished career over six decades saw him serve as a judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria for 21 years, and it is the same Supreme Court that this bill will affect. He contributed not only to this legislation but greatly to our legal system and was a great advocate for victim rights.

This bill will improve access to justice for Victorians by making it possible for class actions to proceed where they would be prevented because of the financial risks to plaintiffs in legal costs. The commission found that in Victoria class actions are under-utilised. I think I heard from other members the figure of five a year, on average. For a class action to proceed there must be a lead or representative plaintiff on behalf of a group of claimants. The real risk for that lead plaintiff is that if the matter is unsuccessful they are sort of left holding the bag. Most of these cases are David versus Goliath cases—telcos, banks and insurance companies that are very well lawyered up. That is their right, that is the process, that is the legal system we have, but it means that if a case is unsuccessful the everyday Joe Blow can lose it all—lose a home, lose whatever he has got. That is not just affecting him; that is affecting his family. When we think about cases of silicosis, that person may already have a life-altering malady inflicted on them, so I think this bill giving access to justice for these people makes sense.

The law reform commission found that if lawyers could charge a percentage amount of a potential settlement whilst at the same time indemnifying that lead plaintiff for the other side’s costs, that would lower the risk for the plaintiff and therefore more cases would likely go ahead where otherwise they would not because of that potential financial burden. This bill achieves this by providing the ability for the Supreme Court to make group costs orders. It is worth restating that the lawyers for the plaintiffs would have to indemnify that plaintiff for any adverse costs in order for the group costs orders to be granted. The court can also order those same lawyers to provide security for those said costs, so the court is instrumental in this process. In practice, a representative or lead plaintiff in a class action may apply to the Supreme Court for a group costs order. The court may then choose to grant such an order which would have the effect of the plaintiff’s lawyers receiving a percentage of any recovered amount.

The Supreme Court has a very important role, as I said, in providing the checks and balances, and these orders are subject to the court’s strict supervision. This bill does not tell the court exactly how to make those decisions. It does not tell them how much to choose as the percentage. That is well within the jurisdiction of that court to decide, and that is the right place. It should not be politicians making that decision; it should be our Supreme Court justices. Therefore this adds further protection for class members and safeguards the fairness of any group costs orders. It is worthy of note also that the court can adjust the percentages at any time within the proceedings.

There are several reasons why this bill will benefit class members, but key to the intent of this bill is to remove any financial barrier to commencing a class action for smaller and lower value claims. In our current system, these can be uneconomic to run but potentially more likely to be run on a group costs order basis. The court is also able to improve transparency within this process for class members, and arrangements should therefore be fairly simple for the members to understand. Percentage-based fees are currently banned under the Legal Profession Uniform Law. However, this bill is not inconsistent with this uniform law because there is no prohibition on the Supreme Court from making a group costs order. I think it is worth saying that we do not necessarily want to take ourselves to an American free-for-all system, where we have 10-metre-high billboards for personal injury lawyers. That is not what this bill is trying to do. This bill is trying to give access to justice for the everyday bloke.

The bill implements one recommendation from the Victorian Law Reform Commission’s Access to Justice report. The government is considering the remaining 13 recommendations, which were directed, and will consult with relevant stakeholders. Should further legislative amendments be required, then they will be introduced at a later time. It is worth noting that in the recommendation we are addressing today the commission stated that the approval of any common fund or group costs orders should be subject to conditions that are set out in legislation, as we bring today, or the Supreme Court’s practice note on class actions. Most of the commission’s recommendations are directed to the Supreme Court on that class actions practice note, and the court is currently working on amendments to it, as is right. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr EREN (Lara) (16:38): I am delighted to be able to make a contribution on this very important bill before the house, the Justice Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2019. At the outset can I congratulate the minister, the Attorney-General, on bringing in yet again another reform of legislation to this Parliament that will make for a better society. We on this side of the house are very conscious of the fact that we are in favour of social justice, and that is what sets us apart from the other side. I am really proud to be a Labor member who enforces some of these laws through this place to make our society a more just society. As members of Parliament we bring in legislation, of course our judicial system applies those laws and then the enforcement agencies enforce those laws accordingly. On occasions we have laws such as this that come before Parliament which will see some of those battlers, some of those people that really cannot get access to justice, get access to justice as a result of this bill. I am so delighted to be making a contribution on this very important bill.

I obviously, like many people in this house, would have a lot of lawyer friends. I know that that is one occupation that tends to cause people to gravitate towards being a member of Parliament. I know that there are a lot of people with law degrees that are members of Parliament. There are a lot of lawyers that are decent lawyers out there that try to help, as much as they can, communities and individuals that are finding it difficult to access justice. There are a lot of lawyers that I know that are decent people that do pro bono work for those people that require it, because they have a sense of social justice themselves. I am really proud of that, obviously. There are certain lawyers firms that we work with as a party. Clearly philosophically we align in some of our views in terms of social justice, and therefore we gravitate towards each other. But there are some law firms, obviously, that strictly abide by the money, in terms of making as much money as they can, and of course in certain circumstances where justice should prevail it does not prevail for some of those in our community that are doing it tough and cannot access justice because they have not got enough money. So this bill will go a long way to giving access to those people that cannot normally access justice, particularly when it comes to class actions.

The amendment to the Supreme Court Act 1986 will provide the Supreme Court of Victoria with the power to make a group costs order, which would improve access to justice for plaintiffs bringing class actions in the Supreme Court. The bill will amend the Local Government Act 1989 and the Magistrates’ Court Act 1989 to ensure the validity and enforceability of the actions and decisions by improperly established municipal electoral tribunals and affected reserve magistrates, make a number of minor and technical amendments to justice acts to correct errors and clarify the operation of various provisions.

The objective of the bill is about delivering access to justice for ordinary Victorians by making it easier to bring class actions for silicosis, wage theft, consumer harm and other forms of corporate wrongdoing. As our population grows, so does the need for access to justice. We know we are a great state in which to live, work and raise a family. There are unfortunately some instances where some workplaces are not safe for workers, and of course we want to make sure that they are.

In relation to silicosis, this government has acted decisively by banning the dry cutting of engineered stone to protect workers from deadly silica dust, and of course we are very proud of that. The new regulations will dramatically cut workers’ exposure to crystalline silica and reduce their likelihood of developing silicosis. In addition the government has developed a silica action plan to stamp out this debilitating disease. The plan includes free health screenings for Victoria’s 1400 stonemasons and a compliance blitz of high-risk workplaces—and rightfully so. As I have indicated, it is a great state to live in and to work in, but there are some inherent dangers in some of the workplaces, and we want to eliminate those because we believe that workers should not be exposed to these sorts of diseases as a result of trying to earn some money, to make a living for themselves or indeed their families.

The government has also committed to passing laws to criminalise wage theft, which is all too common in particularly the hospitality industry, and employers who underpay their workers need to be held to account. As a former Minister for Tourism and Major Events I know the importance of the sector and that to attract people to the sector you need to have accordingly a wage system in which for a hard day’s work equally you get a good day’s pay. But that is not so in all instances. We know the federal government has in certain circumstances discriminated against those particular workers on penalty rates, and certainly it is driving people out of the industry.

Wage theft, as we have seen over the last couple of months, is occurring in some food outlets and restaurants, and it has been proven. Clearly it is a problem out there, and now there are bigger corporates that have been caught out underpaying their staff, whether deliberately or by accident. It should be that people who work hard, that do the hard yards, should not have to pay and suffer the consequences of this type of activity by unscrupulous employers out there.

These are very important reforms in areas affecting everyday Victorians. That is what we are about as a government, protecting the rights of everyday Victorians, because it is those people, the salt-of-the-earth people, that deserve the respect of employers, that need to be protected by laws and that need to be protected by governments, because it is the right thing to do. That is why this bill is before the house.

This bill will allow lawyers to receive a fee that is calculated as a percentage of the settlement damages. This is achieved by enabling the Supreme Court to make what is called a ‘group costs order’. This will shift the burden of costs risk from the lead plaintiff to the plaintiff’s lawyers in return for the lawyers receiving a percentage of any amount recovered as payment of their costs. Under these new group costs orders, and consistent with the Victorian Law Reform Commission’s recommendations, lawyers would be required to indemnify the lead plaintiff for any adverse costs orders and provide security for costs if ordered.

Many in the legal profession support this bill, which is good to see, as an access-to-justice measure. The Law Institute of Victoria’s then president, Stuart Webb, stated that:

Enabling the Supreme Court to make costs orders in class actions will mean that plaintiffs will bear a lower costs risk burden, and may facilitate the bringing of meritorious class actions which might otherwise have not been brought in the face of higher costs risks …

The Victorian president of the Australian Lawyers Alliance, Jeremy King, has stated that:

The ALA welcomes this legislation as it will directly improve access to justice in Victoria … The new law will increase the flexibility and availability of funding which will enable more people to obtain justice through class actions.

Mr King also stated in the Age article by Tammy Mills of 3 February 2020 that:

It will clearly benefit vulnerable and disadvantaged individuals who may otherwise be unable to pursue a claim because of the cost …

The Consumer Action Law Centre also backs the bill and has stated that it:

… will reduce barriers to class actions by allowing lawyers to receive a ‘contingency fee’, a fee that is calculated as a percentage of the settlement of damages.

The Consumer Action Law Centre’s chief executive officer noted that:

Too often class actions do not proceed because the economics don’t stack up for litigation funders … And regulators and other dispute forums, while important aspects of an effective justice system, can’t respond to all misconduct.

The changes in this bill should mean that more class actions are able to proceed. We see so much misconduct affecting vulnerable people by businesses such as payday lenders, debt management firms and even energy companies and telcos. Too often, significant harm goes unremedied.

This is, again, about social justice. That is what we are about; that is what this side of the house is about. I am so proud to be part of a government that actually cares for Victorians that need the help of government and need the help of the justice system. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr PEARSON (Essendon) (16:48): It gives me great joy and great pleasure to be afforded the opportunity of speaking on the Justice Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2019. I did not think I was going to speak on this bill, but I jumped at the chance to speak on it.

Mr Angus interjected.

Mr PEARSON: No, it is important that you are here and you speak and you are counted. It is important that you stand up and that you be counted on these questions.

In reflecting on why I chose to speak on this bill, I reflected upon the life I have lived to date. All of us as we get older reflect on those moments in time, those moments in our lives, which stand out as being particularly relevant to the course of our lives.

Now, I am an atheist—pretty much I think I have always been an atheist—but I knew that I wanted to do something more and be part of something bigger. I knew that I wanted to have a meaningful life and live a fulfilled life. So for me when the opportunity came to join a trade union movement when I was aged 14 years and 10 months, I felt like it was a coming-of-age moment for me, because I felt that finally I belonged to something that was bigger, something that was more meaningful, something that had started long before I was born and something that would continue long after I pass. For me it was always about trying to find ways in which I could contribute in whatever way I could to support the cause of the labour movement.

I have chosen this path and I have come here, and I stand on the shoulders of giants. Next year our great party celebrates 130 years. It is an important and significant moment in time, because there was a recognition from the members of the labour movement back then that striking for individual causes or individual issues on individual jobs was in itself not enough; it was insufficient. So despite looking at the great contribution that the stonemasons made in downing tools at Melbourne University to ask for and demand an 8-hour day, in which they were successful, there was a recognition from the labour movement at that time that you needed to contest political power, parliamentary power, in order to implement your agenda. At every step along the way over the last 129 years we have consistently been opposed by the Liberal Party and its predecessors—at every step along the way. Every gain that we have that is a hallmark now of a civilised society has been achieved through struggle and endeavour, and we have at every step been opposed.

In the world we live in today, the society that we live in today, where you have occupational health and safety laws, where you have WorkCover compensation, where you have universal education—all of these things have been fought for and won by the labour movement, by elected representatives of the labour movement who have sought to make legislative change in this place and in other places as well.

This bill before the house ensures that access to justice can become a far easier reality for working people. Now, I have spoken in the house before about the fact that my grandmother had to borrow money from a relation to get my uncle out on bail and to get a lawyer to represent him in the Magistrates Court so he could appeal a conviction and go on to live a meaningful life. That was really hard for my grandmother. It was extremely difficult and stressful, but for working people that is often the way. It is often the way that justice and access to justice is an incredible struggle. So a bill like this that makes it easier for members of our society, our community, to go to a plaintiff law firm and have the plaintiff law firm act on their behalf—to advocate on behalf of their interest and to seek redress—is a really important step.

It is no great surprise that for conservative politics, they do not get it and they do not support it. Who could ever forget when Bernie Banton dragged himself off his deathbed to go and protest out the front of Tony Abbott’s electorate office in Sydney about the fact that as health minister Mr Abbott was reticent in making medication available for sufferers of mesothelioma. Tony Abbott said:

It was a stunt … Let’s be upfront about this. I know Bernie is very sick, but just because a person is sick doesn’t necessarily mean that he is pure of heart in all things.

That is what Tony Abbott said to a man dying of mesothelioma that he contracted as a consequence of his labour.

Members of our society—I know my parents did and I am sure the member for Lara’s parents did as well—make their living by selling their labour. That was it. It was through selling their labour, selling their time, that they got the funding to raise a family. When you think about that for a moment, workers in those sorts of industries are incredibly vulnerable, because often they are working in non-unionised roles, often they have got low standards of education and often they might be working in a society or an area where there are few job opportunities and there is high unemployment. They are incredibly vulnerable, and they are incredibly exposed. That is why a bill like this is so important, because it sends a signal. It sends a signal to those individuals that if they need to seek redress, there is a pathway for them to seek it and for them to obtain it without having to try and find the sums themselves—the money themselves—to do so.

And you do you know what? It sends a message to industry as well that you have got to do the right thing by your workforce. You have to have a safe workforce. You have got to look after your people. You have got to support your people to make sure that they can live and work in a safe environment.

We recognise, in the Labor Party, that if you want to make real and meaningful change to the lives of working people, it is not just about an EBA. It is not just about one particular initiative or endeavour. It is a systematic approach where you use the entire set of statute books to be able to effect change, to create and mould and build a fair society and build a great society—that is, in the eyes and the minds of working people.

Now, at every step of the way in this great endeavour—in this great and sacred mission—that the labour movement has bestowed upon us we will be opposed by those opposite. That is the reality. It has always been that way, and it will always be that way. They will oppose us at every step of the way. And invariably they are supported by their fellow travellers. You know, once upon a time it was the DLP and the groupers. These days it is the Greens party, who have not, again, bothered to speak on this bill at all, despite the fact that they might talk about having a Marxist as their leader. I think the member for Prahran was quite obsequious and deferential in a previous contribution in this place about his elevation to that august height.

It is always the Labor Party that has acted in the interests of working people. And for me to be given the chance to speak on this bill today is really important, because this is what I came to do. I came to try and make things fairer and better for working people and to create an environment where access to justice becomes easier, fairer and more available for working people. I came to make it easier for people who do not have the money and who only have resources through selling their labour—selling their time—and invariably for precious little. I came to create an environment whereby workers can get access to justice and have the opportunity to be able to live a meaningful and dignified life, and to send a message to the disreputable, irresponsible employers that it is just not good enough, that if you do the wrong thing then you are going to get caught and if you steal wages from your workers there is a consequence—there is a penalty.

Those opposite are quite happy to give those irresponsible businesses a leave pass. You know—‘Look, we’ll just turn a blind eye. We’re not going to use the power of the state to throw the book at you. You can just do your thing and we won’t stop you. We’ll let you get on with it’. Well, that is not what we are here to do in the labour movement. That is not why we have joined the Labor Party. That is not why we are members of a trade union movement. We have come here to change society. We have come here to stop them from ruining the lives of working people, which they have sought to do for generations. A bill like this is so very important because it stops them following their most base of instincts, and I commend the bill to the house.

Ms KAIROUZ (Kororoit—Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Suburban Development) (16:58): I move:

That the debate be now adjourned.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.

Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day.