Thursday, 8 February 2024

Bills

Justice Legislation Amendment (Police and Other Matters) Bill 2023

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Harriet Shing:

That the bill be now read a second time.

Jacinta ERMACORA (Western Victoria) (09:57): This bill strengthens community confidence in our hardworking Victoria Police members. It amends several acts, strengthening integrity within the police disciplinary system, and ensures that those officers discovered doing the wrong thing are appropriately held to account as well as increasing public trust in the police disciplinary system by ensuring clear communication of behavioural expectations to the communities that police serve. This bill also aims to bolster Victoria’s firearms regulations, expands police operational circumstances when a vehicle-immobilising device can be utilised and supports the functions of the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel.

This bill amends the Worker Screening Act 2020 and the Child Employment Act 2003 to bring police custody officer requirements for working with children checks into line with other Victorian police roles. It also amends the Fire Rescue Victoria Act 1958 to ensure rights, responsibilities and obligations for non-assigned staff are aligned with legislated rights, responsibilities and obligations of assigned staff. It also amends the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 to address a potential ambiguity in section 77 of the act. The amendment clarifies a court’s power to extend any limitation periods.

I will now make some remarks about the importance of strengthening and supporting police integrity. We know that the vast majority of Victoria Police members uphold the values and professional standards expected of them. And they enjoy the confidence and respect of the communities they serve. Policing is a challenging job in all environments and situations, and I thank police members for their hard work and dedication. The Allan government is committed to working alongside Victoria Police, ensuring that they continue to have the best available equipment, and to supporting the growth and development of the dedicated officers of Victoria Police. However, in 2022 Victoria Police reported an increase in disciplinary hearings for both breach of discipline and criminal offences by officers. This bill seeks to strengthen Victoria Police’s disciplinary system by enshrining the power of the Chief Commissioner of Police to issue a binding code of conduct for prescribing a failure to comply with the code of conduct as a breach of discipline. It sounds like a minor thing but is extremely important. We might as well give the code of conduct some teeth. It is important too that those officers being disciplined face appropriate consequences. This bill will ensure that officers facing discipline understand that their behaviour needs to change to meet community standards.

Victoria Police members are entrusted with highly confidential police information. This information is, for example, names and addresses of victims of crime and perpetrators and information being collected on a progressive basis during an investigation. Again, most members of Victoria Police ensure that the confidential information they hold is dealt with appropriately, sensitively and securely. However, in some cases that information has been misused or inappropriately disclosed. In October 2022 a Victorian Inspectorate special report identified that family violence perpetrated by an officer occurred after that officer accessed privileged information. This allowed the perpetrator to expose the survivor to ongoing family violence. This is an example of intentional misuse of information. In fact the intentional misuse of information was purposefully used to facilitate criminal behaviour. This crime had a significant impact on the victim.

Auditing and investigations into misuse of police information can be lengthy. In some cases the existing statute of limitations runs out on those investigations. The bill increases the statute of limitations on section 227 of the Victoria Police Act 2013 from 12 months to three years. This ensures that those who misuse police information are held accountable as the broader community is held accountable.

Some misuses of information are inadvertent, however, and reflect more a cultural lack of awareness rather than intentional as referred to above. I recall an embarrassing situation at my local police station last year. I will say that I was there to get something signed. There were several customers waiting, like me, in the foyer. The foyer is quite small, which makes it impossible not to hear everything that is being said between the police officer at the counter and a community member. I was uncomfortable when I had to listen to a woman describing the intimidation from a rural neighbour. They were a farming family, and she and her family were being regularly intimidated by their neighbour. From what I could hear, her family had been experiencing this for some time and this was not the first time the police had been involved. I was embarrassed for her that I had to listen to her personal information, as were the other people in the foyer. I truly wanted to melt into the wall and pretend I was not there. I do not think the officer was aware that we were all embarrassed or that the woman may have felt humiliated to tell her story in front of strangers, and what was particularly disappointing was that two confidential meeting rooms were right there, a couple of metres away, and they were not used. It was also concerning that she was not offered a confidential place in which to tell her story. After all, one of the bystanders may have been known to her or the person she was making the report about.

This is a common scenario in a regional community. I do not believe this scenario was intentional or even careless; I suspect it reflected simply a cultural lack of awareness. This bill seeks to strengthen the police act to support participants in the restorative engagement and redress scheme for Victoria Police. The amendment exempts the Secretary of the Department of Justice and Community Safety from reporting matters suspected to involve corrupt or improper conduct or misconduct. This will ensure participants in the scheme are not retraumatised. It will address risks of privacy breaches and stop the erosion of trust felt by participants affected by those breaches. The scheme already includes a voluntary reporting option for corrupt conduct.

Here in Victoria we have some of the strongest firearms regulations worldwide, and we in the Allan Labor government are committed to ensuring that our regulations remain current and are able to respond to changing community needs. The bill amends the Firearms Act 1996 to allow for licensed firearms dealers to take possession of a firearm from an unlicensed person to sell, register or destroy it. This bill therefore gives greater security to licensed firearms dealers to actively participate in the national firearms amnesty. I think this provides enormous strength to the ongoing reduction of the number of guns in our community. It does not limit the restriction of gun ownership or guns floating around our community to a particular set of dates but provides ongoing ability for firearms dealers to accept arms as they come in at any point, which is extremely positive – a huge safety mechanism. We know that occasionally the connection between mental health issues and ownership of firearms can be an issue. This allows for family members to bring a firearm to a dealer and ensure that their family is safe or that the risks are reduced.

We are proactively ensuring community safety when it comes to large-capacity detachable magazines from firearms by limiting the opportunity for misuse of firearms like bolt action shotguns. The bill places conditions on certain category licence-holders, the holders of A and A and B licences. They may not carry a detachable magazine with more than five shots in combination with a bolt action shotgun except where they are participating in a chief commissioner approved event.

The bill also enhances Victoria Police’s operational response for community safety. It expands situations where vehicle-immobilisation devices may be used. Where police have suspicion on reasonable grounds that a person, by driving or attempting to drive, is likely to endanger or cause injury to themselves, police or others, vehicle-immobilising devices may be used. This will ensure greater community safety through pre-emptive action to prevent harm to the community.

The bill seeks also to strengthen the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel operations to ensure that the CVEMAP and other schemes can run efficiently and effectively. Restrictions on information sharing have created barriers to the sharing of risk information when a CVEMAP member is unavailable. The amendments will provide that information is able to be shared in a timely manner. Critical case management decisions can be made appropriately with all available information. This is a commonsense change, and it also provides for appropriate emergency response rather than delays in emergency response – we all know that acting quickly in an emergency is what it is all about.

An amendment to the Worker Screening Act 2020 and Child Employment Act 2003 to exempt police custody officers and police custody officer supervisors from requiring a working with children check is also included in this bill. This brings the requirements into line with the frontline Victoria Police roles. It also amends the Fire Rescue Victoria Act to enable the minister to ensure that the allocation of rights, liabilities and obligations for staff not assigned to a particular situation is captured, ensuring consistency with arrangements already legislated for staff assigned to a particular situation.

It also amends the VCAT act to address potential ambiguity as to the operation of section 77. The recent court decision on Krongold Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd raised the question as to the power to extend limitation periods applied to third parties who were not joined to a VCAT proceeding. That proceeding was referred to court under section 77 of the act. This bill clarifies that when a matter is referred to a court under section 77 of the act, the court will have the power to extend any limitation period, including to any party that was not joined at the VCAT proceeding.

In closing, these amendments are sensible, logical and most importantly go to the heart of protecting our community and confidential police information, upholding the integrity of our police officers and encouraging confidence in the operations and conduct of our police for our community, and I support the bill.

Trung LUU (Western Metropolitan) (10:12): I rise today to speak on the Justice Legislation Amendment (Police and Other Matters) Bill 2023. Before I do, I would just like to take the opportunity to welcome and congratulate my colleague Richard Welch, member for North-Eastern Metropolitan Region. Welcome to the chamber.

The bill focuses on a range of policing reforms that aim to strengthen the integrity of one of our state’s greatest institutions and discipline systems: that is, the Victorian police force and other agencies that maintain community safety. This bill will achieve several amendments, such as to the Child Employment Act 2003, the Fire Rescue Victoria Act 1958, the Firearms Act 1996, the Road Safety Act 1986 and the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003.

I would like to speak about improvement, and I will focus on the internal improvement of Victoria Police’s discipline process and the restoration of the engagement and duress scheme by supporting participants’ privacy, strengthening Victoria Police’s capacity to regulate firearms, expanding the circumstances in which Victoria Police can deploy a vehicle-immobilising device and supporting the functions of countering violent extremism. This bill will enable police to have greater capacity to protect our community and to re-establish rapport and the community’s confidence, which Victoria Police somewhat in many ways lost or overlooked during the long COVID lockdowns that we experienced in Victoria. In their defence, as a police officer, and for all of those in service, I understand part of their role and duties is to follow orders and take directions from those above. Certainly police integrity and demonstrating that police have the community’s best interests at heart would be a good start in the right direction in regaining community trust and confidence, and this is what this bill does. It enables police to show the community the integrity that police have.

Before I continue, I just want to emphasise that we are amending the police integrity section. We talk a lot about that, but I want to clearly mention that when we speak about police integrity, 99.9 per cent of police out there do the right thing and act with great integrity. It is that 0.1 per cent that has occasionally a lapse of judgement or maybe goes in the wrong direction. Overall the police force and all its members have always acted with great integrity in relation to carrying out their duties.

This bill will also strengthen police capacity to provide community safety. In supporting the countering of violent terrorism, expanding the capacity to deploy immobilising devices is a great capacity which the police can utilise in supporting our community. I will give you an example of why I say they need this additional amendment. Not long ago we experienced something that for many in the community was unheard of and unforeseen, the Bourke Street mall incident, when many innocent lives were lost and many more Victorian lives were affected – and still are to this day. The capacity of this amendment in this bill will enable police to prevent future incidents like the ones which Victorians have experienced in the past. The crime rate is increasing, as we are experiencing currently, and new sorts of vehicles can be extremely dangerous. People say firearms are weapons, but you have to understand that in the hands of a person with great intent to harm people a vehicle can be just as deadly. When a vehicle is utilised in that way, this bill will give police the power to be prevent such incidents happening.

I must stress that regardless of what legislation we pass in this house, without police officers – the manpower, the people who carry out and execute this legislation – the law is just words on paper, law and legislation without substance. I say this because at the moment Victorians are experiencing increasing crime, particularly youth crime, an increase in violence and, sadly, an increase in overdoses and drug use. Statistics show that this has effects across the entire state, not just in my area. I will give an example in relation to Western Metropolitan, the constituency which I represent. Crime stats from Melbourne’s west show Wyndham Vale has one of the fastest growing communities in Victoria. It had 13,833 reported incidents over the year, an increase of 14.9 per cent on the previous year. I will just pick a few, because I cover quite a few communities out in the west, being a member for Western Metropolitan Region. From Maribyrnong City Council there was an increase of 5.9 per cent over 2022–23 in total criminal incidents reported. The suburb next to it had an increase of 8.1 per cent over 2022–23; last year there were 12,864 criminal incidents reported. Moving further out, as I mentioned, Wyndham Vale has the fastest growing population in Victoria. It had 14,396 criminal incidents reported, an increase of 15.9 per cent.

What is more disturbing is the cases that are unsolved in these areas. Fifty-two per cent of crimes are unsolved in Brimbank, 62 per cent of crimes are unsolved in Maribyrnong and 52.7 per cent are unsolved in Wyndham Vale. What this is saying is not that the police are not doing their job. It is all in relation to the manpower and the capacity – having police there to follow up on these crimes that are reported. Police are doing great job, but we have got to enable them to do so, and that is with manpower and resources. At the moment, while crime rates are going up, our police numbers are unfortunately falling, and there are many factors in relation to why police numbers are falling. I have stressed in this house, and previously through the years, in relation to advocating for more police in the area, what the government can do for police in Victoria. Due to the population increasing, we do need extra resources to manage that.

I will go back in relation to what effect it has on the community. Only recently in January – that is last month – a councillor from Brimbank, a municipality where I used to be a councillor, actually went out and spoke up in relation to what is happening in her area. She stated that recent attacks, coupled with rising crime statistics, have left the community feeling increasingly unsafe:

The crime statistics are up, but police numbers are down and continuing to fall. When I’ve met with residents in Brimbank they tell me that they’re terrified of home invasions and rising youth crime.

People are terrified of home invasions, especially those living on their own and elderly residents.

That is coming from the grassroots, where a councillor is actually speaking to people on the ground. Where Casey had an opportunity to speak to people in our municipality, we actually got to people who were speaking on the ground, and that is a concern at the moment, especially in my region; that is a great concern to me. This is something I would like to point out: not only is the crime rate increasing and are violent attacks regularly reported, but people like councillors need to speak up and go to the paper and stress the issue arising with police numbers – the constant decrease in police numbers to execute and carry out their job, to enforce the laws as required. I will state that with all legislation, when people carry it out, it is just ink on paper, and until the law is passed it is without substance.

Let me put some stats in relation to what I have been saying. Police are down, and I will give you examples in my area. I know there is a crisis around Victoria. Every policing service area has a certain designated police station which services that area. They need a core number per station to manage that, including managing the station, going on patrol, having investigators and having police attend incidents. Now I am going to read you some numbers in relation to the police stations in my region in the west and the core numbers for those stations to operate. This is from just last year. I will start from the bottom. Williamstown police station: the core strength required to operate that service area is 36. The actual number is 33, so they are 8 per cent down. That is the start. Moving forward to Altona: core strength is 46 to operate their service area. The actual number is only 32 – 30 per cent down. Then we move out to Werribee: core strength is 92 police officers to man the area. The actual number is only 64 – 28 vacancies; that is 30 per cent lower. Sunshine: core strength is 100, and they only have 61 actually working there; there are 39 vacancies, 39 per cent down from core strength. Caroline Springs: core strength 40, and we only have 28. There are 12 vacancies – that is another 30 per cent down. So you can see that throughout the west every police station is down, from 8 per cent to 30 per cent of core strength. I understand there are various reasons – people are sick, people are on secondment – but with population numbers increasing, we have got to increase the police numbers, not decrease essential services. So I will stress again and again in this chamber: the government needs to do better to increase the police numbers and provide opportunity and resources for Victoria Police to service the community. I hope, in relation to the amendments, this bill will be able to point out very clearly what is required to make the community safe, what is required to enable the government to pass legislation so our community can feel secure. This bill, in relation to integrity and police rapport with the community, is heading in the right direction.

I will quickly mention before we wrap up firearms that this bill is also going in a great, positive direction in relation to reducing firearms. There are a lot of drive-by shootings which are not reported in the paper but which police are aware of. Believe me, having served for 28 years, there has been an increase in drive-by shootings, which is not really reported in the paper. But there is an increase of firearms in our community, and what this bill does is give us the ability to reduce these firearms in our society. I commend that. That is a great amendment in relation to the capability of people to surrender firearms and lessen the opportunity to do more harm to our community. In closing, I support this bill.

Samantha RATNAM (Northern Metropolitan) (10:26): I rise to speak to the Justice Legislation Amendment (Police and Other Matters) Bill 2023. The Greens support this bill as it is a step in the right direction, including small improvements to the internal disciplinary processes of Victoria Police plus a range of other issues. Among the range of changes proposed by this bill, of particular note are the extension of the statute of limitations for IBAC from 12 months to three years to investigate offences of accessing, using or disclosing police information following IBAC and Victorian Inspectorate reports; the amendment of the Victoria Police Act 2013 to support participants in the restorative engagement and redress scheme for Victoria and to allow for the secretary to provide deidentified and thematic information from the redress scheme to IBAC; the expansion of court powers to extend the limitation period for federal jurisdictional matters referred to them by VCAT; and the amendment of the Firearms Act 1996 to allow a licensed firearms dealer to receive a firearm from an unlicensed person – this supports the ongoing national firearms amnesty. The bill will also allow Victoria Police to attach conditions to a good behaviour bond for PSOs who have committed a breach of discipline or a criminal offence.

We note the provision to amend the Victoria Police Act 2013 to include the Victoria Police code of conduct and prescribe noncompliance as a breach of discipline; however, we remain concerned that little will actually change in practice. We know that the current Victoria Police code of conduct is non-specific and vague and that existing legislation already requires police not to engage in conduct that is likely to bring Victoria Police into disrepute. As we have advocated for some years, further work is still required to properly review and strengthen the Victoria Police code of conduct.

But the elephant that is in the room is what is missing from the overall reform agenda: IBAC was not designed as, nor is it fit for purpose as, the oversight mechanism for police. Attorney, I know that you have flagged that police oversight reform is on the agenda for this year, and we look forward to working collaboratively with you. We encourage you to base those reforms on the proven, successful model of the police ombudsman in Northern Ireland. Without an independent police ombudsman, even with the changes in this bill, Victoria Police still get to set their own rules and police themselves. An independent police ombudsman such as the world’s best practice that operates in Northern Ireland would be able to investigate and provide binding recommendations on police disciplinary processes.

I will now move on to amendments that we have for this bill, and I ask that they be please circulated now.

Amendments circulated pursuant to standing orders.

Samantha RATNAM: These amendments come from consultations both within community legal services and particularly a support group of victims of police misconduct. That group includes a number of current and former police employees. They have put forward these amendments to provide clarity and certainty for police employees wishing to make a lawful disclosure to IBAC. They do support the proposed amendments to sections 266 and 227 as pro accountability but suggest that clarity from these amendments is also required. Currently IBAC assesses whether a disclosure is protected or not and whether IBAC has jurisdiction after the police officer has made their disclosure. The stakeholders have expressed concerns about making disclosures to IBAC without it being first very clear that they would not be found in breach of their duties if IBAC assesses their disclosure as outside jurisdiction or not protected. This amendment clarifies this issue.

It takes a lot of courage to be a whistleblower, particularly for those in institutions of power like the police. To ensure police officers know they are not in breach of their police duties by disclosing to IBAC at the time of disclosure would support them. This will promote transparency and accountability by helping current police raise concerns about police culture and systemic issues, such as racism or practices having potential adverse impacts on particularly vulnerable groups, which may or may not be protected disclosures.

My colleague Katherine Copsey, who is our justice portfolio holder and is unwell today, and her team have had detailed discussions with the minister’s office about the wording of this amendment. The advice the minister’s office received was that section 227 already provides that a current or former member of Victoria Police personnel must not, without reasonable excuse, access, use or disclose any police information if it is not directly related to the member’s functions or duties as a member of Victoria Police personnel. The stakeholders that are advocating for this amendment we have proposed have advised that the wording was carefully considered prior to proposing the change. The issues for the members of the group were and remain clarity and safety, given ‘a reasonable excuse’ has been a term misused in both directions by Victoria Police in the past. One victim-survivor said in their case ‘a reasonable excuse’ was used to justify disclosing an escape plan to a police perpetrator’s manager. It has also been used to accuse members of misconduct for speaking up in other cases.

The advice also included that there is an intersection of the Public Interest Disclosures Act 2012. Section 39 establishes an immunity for making a public interest disclosure and whistleblowing conduct. However, our advice has been that the wording of the Public Interest Disclosures Act is not clear. In fact this demonstrates why the amendment is needed. In short, if officers think they may possibly be charged for making a disclosure to IBAC, they will not make a disclosure, and that undermines police integrity and transparency. So I recommend our amendment, and we will speak further to it during the committee stage.

Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (10:32): I am pleased to rise to speak on the Justice Legislation Amendment (Police and Other Matters) Bill 2023, a bill which seeks to make a range of amendments to a range of acts, including the Victoria Police Act 2013, the Firearms Act 1996, the Road Safety Act 1986 and the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003, to introduce a range of reforms aimed at maintaining community safety and improving community safety by increasing Victoria Police’s capacity to regulate firearms, making administrative enhancements to the operation of the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel and expanding the circumstances in which police officers are authorised to use vehicle-immobilising devices. The bill also includes a range of reforms aimed at strengthening the integrity of the police disciplinary system and ensuring that Victoria Police personnel operate in a way that is consistent with community expectations. The bill will also enhance the privacy of participants in the restorative engagement redress scheme for Victoria Police and make minor technical amendments to other Victorian legislation.

In Victoria this Labor government is committed to ensuring that everyone is safe in their communities, and the backbone of our efforts to ensure community safety and ensure that people are safe in their homes and in their businesses and in their communities is Victoria Police and its 20,000 employees, including police officers, sworn officers and protective services officers. They are the backbone of ensuring community safety here in the state of Victoria. As I mentioned yesterday in the chamber in debate on a motion on youth offending, this Labor government over the course of the last nine years, since 2014, has been continuously investing in the capability of Victoria Police. We have been providing them not only with resources for additional officers but improving the equipment that they have available to them so that the resources that Victoria Police have at their disposal to ensure that our community are safe are first class – more police, more PSOs, upgraded police stations and the best kinds of technology.

As a result of that and I suppose commensurate with the investments that we are making to ensure that Victoria Police has the tools at its disposal to do the job that we ask of it, we do have underpinning that systems to ensure that policing effort is done to the highest possible standards and with the strongest integrity and accountability mechanisms taking place. That is why some of the accountability mechanisms and the administrative mechanisms that are put in place in this bill are so fundamentally important, because confidence in Victoria Police, and confidence in any policing system, is one of the cornerstones of effective community safety. So commensurate with the additional resources and additional emphasis on the sorts of powers that police need to do their job effectively is a commitment to ensuring that that action is underpinned by the most robust systems of integrity that we can possibly have here in the state of Victoria. That is why some of the amendments that we see in this legislation to the Victoria Police Act seek to improve and strengthen some of those systems of accountability with respect to the way Victoria Police does things like dealing with consequences of breaches of its code of conduct to ensure that when there are, for example, failures to comply with a binding code of conduct issued by the Chief Commissioner of Police, this can result in disciplinary action but also importantly ensure that that code can be adaptive, responsive and updated in line with community needs and expectations, which is why it sits in a legislative framework sense where it does rather than in the principal act. It is a specific legislative design to ensure that those codes and those frameworks can be kept up to date, that we have this culture of continuous improvement and that we have systems in place that facilitate the continuous improvement of culture rather than things being stuck in time.

There are further amendments that are made to authorise discipline inquiry officers to direct police officers and PSOs subject to disciplinary inquiries to undertake medical assessments, which are important to evaluate both medical and physical fitness to ensure they are fit to participate in hearings. So we have got a range of tools available to us so that disciplinary hearings are not unnecessarily delayed whilst there are ill-health reasons. There are also a range of matters which can be said to attach to good behaviour bonds for police who may find themselves on the wrong side of a disciplinary proceeding.

The legislation will also extend the statute of limitations for the offence of accessing or using or disclosing police information. One of the things that we have in the sworn officers of Victoria Police is special obligations and trust that reside in them for accessing certain types of information, and obviously we want to make sure that the systems and rules are in place to make sure that that is not misused. This legislation will extend the statute of limitations on those offences for a longer period of time.

The other thing that this legislation seeks to do and we think is particularly important is continue to show the government’s support for participants in the restorative engagement and redress scheme by making improvements to their privacy and their autonomy in reporting. The redress scheme is designed to make improvements to the way Victoria Police does its work. The reality is that often participants in the scheme report to it in order to improve the culture of Victoria Police. They are seeking to add their voices and lend their experience to the process of continuous improvement of police culture and operational practice, and it is important for them to be able to do that in a private and non-adversarial setting.

Under the changes proposed by this legislation, the scheme, which is operated by the Secretary of the Department of Justice and Community Safety, will not be required to provide information to police oversight agencies that could lead to the identification of participants. By removing these requirements from the secretary of the department in terms of providing information to police oversight agencies with respect to the reporting of behaviour which is potential improper conduct, we can ensure that the redress scheme is actually focused on what it is trying to achieve, which is to give participants in that scheme the confidence to come forward and that the information they provide will be dealt with in an appropriate way and to reduce the risk of breaching their privacy or retraumatising them, having made the important step of deciding to come forward and tell their story. We hope that these changes will ensure that these participants, or potential participants, are not dissuaded from coming forward, and that is what they are designed to do.

There are a range of other amendments that are being brought forward in this legislation, including to the Firearms Act, which I mentioned briefly at the outset. I think it is fair to say that some of the world’s strongest firearm controls are right here in Victoria, and I think all Victorians should be proud of the strict nature of the firearms controls that we have in place in this state. We have been, unfortunately, in our past victims – as a community and with individual loss of life – of incidents where individuals have taken multiple lives using firearms. I think what our history demonstrates is that the Victorian community have said repeatedly that those sorts of things are not acceptable and are willing to support, and do support, controls on firearms to ensure that those events never happen again. That is why a well-regulated firearms industry is so critical and important, because firearms do exist in our community; we do understand there are some, particularly in the agricultural and farming sectors, who need to use them. But it is about ensuring that firearms are in the hands of people who are responsible and not allowing firearms to slip into the hands of those who would use them for nefarious purposes.

There are two main changes that this legislation is making to the Firearms Act to assist that. Firstly, the bill seeks to provide licensed firearm dealers the ability to receive, accept and take possession of a firearm from an unlicensed person for the purposes of sale, registration or destruction, which brings Victoria into line with the national firearms amnesty and helps ensure that there are not barriers to getting dangerous weapons off the streets, which is ultimately what should be the goal here. If someone does have an unregistered firearm, we want to make sure that they can do the right thing and hand it in and make it safe without fear of arrest or prosecution; that is the whole point of having a firearms amnesty. More to the point, not only is it the right kind of policy setting, but we have got actual evidence that it works. Since the nation’s first implementation of the buyback and amnesty scheme, more than 650,000 weapons have been surrendered. No-one can doubt that our community is safer for the removal of firearms from our streets and from our community, particularly those that are unregistered.

The second important change the legislation seeks to make is to restrict the use of bolt action shotguns paired with detachable magazines that have a capacity of greater than five shots by individuals who hold specific licences. Bolt action shotguns are not needed for recreational activities. Certainly many of us, including yourself, Acting President Galea, have had some familiarity with recreational activities involving the use of firearms in the last 12 months, and it is very clear that bolt action shotguns, for example, we do not need, we do not require, and recreational activities do not require guns that can cycle through ammunition that fast. Under the amendment in this act, those who have obtained category A or A and B long arm firearm licences under the guise of hunting and sports cannot have a bolt action shotgun with a large-capacity detachable magazine. They are important amendments to be making to ensure firearm safety across the community, and all credit to the minister responsible for this. They have been based on extensive consultation across the community with a lot of interested groups, and we think fundamentally that they will support community safety.

Very briefly, there are some amendments that we are making to the Road Safety Act 1986 to improve circumstances where police are authorised to use vehicle-immobilisation devices, such as road spikes and Stop Sticks. Instead of the reactive use of these devices, police will be able to implement pre-emptive measures in the presence of a reasonable suspicion – another reform that is being made to try and keep our roads safer. We know that there are too many lives lost on our roads, and this legislation is giving us another tool in the toolkit to make crucial changes on how police can use their powers and tools to prevent dangerous driving. We have seen in other states, particularly in Western Australia in the last year or so, why changes like this are so important and critical to the safety of our police officers and to safeguard the roads from dangerous users.

There are a range of other amendments to the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003, which I do not have time to go into. This legislation is being driven by one approach, and that is to make our community safer, and I commend the bill to the house.

Ann-Marie HERMANS (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:47): I also rise to speak on the Justice Legislation Amendment (Police and Other Matters) Bill 2023. Like my colleague, I also would like to start by taking the opportunity to welcome our new colleague on this side of the chamber Richard Welch. Welcome to the house. It is good to have you here.

This particular bill is an interesting one. Like so many in a situation where a government is in chaos, this one is a conglomeration, like others that we have had, of a number of different things that have been put into a justice legislation amendment bill. It covers a range of different topics, again showing the chaos that this government continues to leave us in and with, and this is like some of their solutions to deal with many of the situations that are now arising and have been arising in our society to perhaps put some measures in place.

The first purpose of this bill is to amend the Child Employment Act 2003 in relation to a working with children check and also to amend the Worker Screening Act 2020 in relation to exemptions from a working with children check. I must say that there are other professions, like teaching, where you do not need to have the working with children check because you do the police check and it is assumed then that as part of that role you have that working with children check. I understand that this has been built into this particular bill on that same understanding and premise that there are particular vocations where, yes, the person needs to be safe, they need to be checked, they need to be monitored – there are very strict rules around that – but sometimes going through all the documentation and adherences, they are actually a little bit on the obsolete side. It is like you are doubling up, and so my understanding is that that is why that has been put into the bill. I do not have any problems with this. I do want to say, though, at the outset that as the Liberal Party we are really against governments controlling and being in people’s faces and having big government telling everybody what to do and putting massive restrictions on everybody. We do not like that. That is why we have the Liberal Party, the word ‘liberal’ recognising the freedom of the individual. However, having said that, we live in very challenging times when serious incidents have taken place over the last 20 years to do with terrorism and to do with safety.

I can say that in my area of the south-east there are ongoing challenges, as I continue to doorknock and speak to constituents, with crime and with people needing to feel safe, and we need the police to feel empowered to do their job and to do it well. I hesitate though, also knowing that in the south-east, the area which I represent, there are a number of people who are uneasy or feel uncomfortable with treatment that they have encountered in times gone by, when there has been a feeling of being bullied or harassed. So there is that sense of discomfort that comes with tightening the laws. It is a fine line when tightening the laws to empower the police to do their job and to do it better and to provide safety for them in their roles, which I think is incredibly important.

I might add that one of my daughters seriously looked at becoming a policewoman. She has finished school. She has not yet done that, but it is certainly a vocation that is right up there as something that she thinks would be really worthwhile and would be a wonderful thing to be able to engage in. With my maternal instincts of course I would want my daughter to be safe – I would want everyone’s daughters and sons and the people that are in the workplace in the police force to be safe and to have the powers they need to be able to catch those who are criminals and who are doing things that make others unsafe. This is what this particular bill will address. It will be interesting to monitor it to see how effective these changes are and whether in the future additional changes will need to be made or modified to allow even police within the force to feel heard, listened to and treated with respect.

I think most people that go into the police force do so with tremendous intentions, good intent and a desire to keep their community safe. Maybe they know a person in the police force that they have admired and respected and that they feel made the job very appealing. To all of the people that work in the police force I just want to say: thank you very much for the work that you are doing. We certainly need you to put yourselves out there and to keep us safe.

I do want to address, again, some of the things that are in here. If we move back to the actual purpose of the bill, one of the other things it talks about is the Fire Rescue Victoria Act 1958. This particular bill is going to provide for the allocation of certain property, rights, liabilities and obligations of the Country Fire Authority to Fire Rescue Victoria. Having been the Shadow Minister for Emergency Services, I am well versed in some of the tensions, anxiety and disappointments that the merge and the changes have caused to people in the CFA. I do appreciate the work of both the FRV and the CFA. I have had the tremendous opportunity of being able to take part in Fire Ops 101, and I am very, very grateful for that. I think it is a tremendous vocation to be in. If you are in the FRV, in my opinion it is a wonderful profession and you are very privileged to be in that position too. But I also want to shout out to the CFA, because they do a tremendous job of putting themselves out there. The majority of them who have not been part of the CFA working within the FRV realm are working as volunteers, and they put themselves out. They have to, unfortunately, work with very old resources which really could do with an upgrade. That would be an important thing to address. I am not sure how the CFA completely feels in terms of all of these things, but I guess that will be determined in the future as debate on this particular bill unfolds and it moves through the houses and becomes an act.

This bill is also to amend the Firearms Act 1996 in relation to the surrender of firearms to licensed firearm dealers and also special conditions for long arm licences. Now, as many have mentioned in this chamber, it is also going to restrict the number of bullets, basically, that you can have. There is I think a five-capacity limit that will be able to be shot in combination with a bolt action shotgun. This is on the lower end of the range that was originally proposed by those who were actually consulted, but given that we have had situations here in Victoria that have involved firearms, I do take the point that five shots are and should be sufficient in terms of what is taking place on a farm with an animal. I personally have had to watch a cow being killed with a shotgun for food, and unfortunately it did not die with the first bullet. It is one of those things you do not forget, especially when you have made eye contact with a dying cow or a dying animal. It is something you do not really forget. But I think five bullets is adequate – more than adequate. I know that was one of the concerns: in farming situations, would you need that extra capacity? Five is a lower limit, but this is the range that has been proposed in this bill. I guess this is going to be one of these things that we are going to have to continually be looking at in terms of category A or A and B long arm firearm licences and the use of these particular guns.

I also note that this bill looks at the Road Safety Act 1986 to provide further for the use of vehicle-immobilisation devices. I guess many of us have watched these car chases in movies where the police are trying to get someone – sometimes actual footage. Situations where people will try to make that unnecessary getaway can be quite dangerous – or when their car has not completely stopped – and I can see why this is being put in place. Again, this is going to be one of those things that we have to continually be looking at, but I think this is more going to be another way to lay a charge. I am not sure that for a person who is really wanting to get away this is going to stop them from attempting that. Perhaps that was not what was in mind when it was put in place.

The Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 is also going to be amended by this particular bill:

(i) for the procedures and operation of the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-Agency Panel …

This is obviously a good thing, I would I think. Again, it needs to be monitored. And:

(ii) for the powers of the courts and the Secretary’s delegates in relation to support and engagement orders …

Look, nobody in this day and age wants to live in a situation where they do not feel safe and where they do not feel that they can be protected. I cannot help, though, remember that it was under a Labor government that we had rubber bullets being fired on civilians at the shrine. That was not for an act of terrorism; that was simply a peaceful gathering. I was not there, but I can say that I had at the time turned on my TV for a break from the screen at work. I turned it on and I watched it live, and I could not believe what I saw. I actually cried. There were tears rolling down my eyes to think that in Victoria it had come to this. It was so unnecessary. So many people being shot at in the back – honestly, I do not think that is an image I will ever forget. Having said that, I know that our police do a great job and we need to have laws that will protect them and civilians.

There are a number of minor and technical amendments in this act as well. Again, as I said, these are all things that we are going to have to continue to monitor. As a Liberal, as I said, I do not feel comfortable with constantly putting things in red tape to put more and more restrictions on Victorians. But I do want Victorians to be safe, and I do want police to be empowered to do their job. As has been mentioned in this chamber, the majority of police are fantastic. They do a wonderful job with great intentions. There is just the occasional person where power can actually make them difficult, and they can make other people’s lives difficult as well and unnecessarily so.

In terms of the Victoria Police Act 2013 this bill is going to amend the code of conduct for Victoria Police personnel. It is going to amend the medical assessments of fitness and the conditions that may be imposed on a police officer or a protective services officer for a breach of discipline. Again, these things all concern me if they are done in a way that is actually an abuse of power or in a way that is unfair, but if they are done in the right way with the right reasons and the right restrictions then I do not have a problem with that. The restorative engagement and redress scheme for current and former Victoria Police personnel will also be amended, and the unauthorised access and use and disclosure of police information will also be amended by this. The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 in relation to the federal subject matter and, as I mentioned earlier, the working with children check for the Worker Screening Act will also be amended.

So there are a number of things that this bill actually does address, and we are not opposed to them as an opposition or as a coalition. But we will be watching to see how these things are administered in public and in the domains for which they are intended.

David ETTERSHANK (Western Metropolitan) (11:03): I rise to make a brief contribution on the Justice Legislation Amendment (Police and Other Matters) Bill 2023. I will limit my contribution to the amendments aimed at strengthening police accountability. These amendments have been introduced in the wake of the Victorian Inspectorate’s special report entitled IBAC’s Referral and Oversight of Emma’s Complaints about Victoria Police’s Response to Family Violence by a Police Officer. Briefly, the special report finds that IBAC, the organisation tasked with police oversight in Victoria, seriously failed in its handling of Emma’s case. Victoria Police became aware that Emma was being abused by her husband, a senior constable, in 2018, and he was subsequently charged with family violence offences in 2020. Emma had provided confidential information to a family violence officer, including her plans to escape with her children interstate. That confidential information was leaked to her abuser, forcing her to abandon the plan and putting her and her children at considerable risk. When Emma took her concerns about the handling of her case to IBAC, rather than investigating, IBAC referred her complaint to Victoria Police’s professional standards command for review. Aside from the danger this placed Emma and her children in, the delays in dealing with her case meant that the officer who leaked her information could not be prosecuted, due to the existing statute of limitations on disciplinary action for the offence of unlawfully accessing, using or disclosing police information.

None of the opportunities to look closely at systemic issues within Victoria Police – the possible corruption within the force, the conflicts of interest affecting the independent investigation process and the evident unwillingness of officers to act against their own – were pursued. The inspectorate’s report exposed fundamental failings in our system of police integrity and oversight in this state. This bill addresses some of those issues. Enshrining the Victoria Police code of conduct and expressly stating that noncompliance can constitute a breach of discipline is commended. I feel that the use of a more forceful verb such as ‘does’ would be more effective, but it is a good first step. Authorising a discipline inquiry officer to direct a police officer or PSO to undertake an independent medical assessment of their physical and mental fitness to participate in disciplinary proceedings will prevent officers from avoiding or delaying the disciplinary process simply because they are on leave and will bring Victoria Police disciplinary procedures into line with other workplaces.

The extension of the statute of limitations for the offence of accessing, using or disclosing police information from 12 months to three years has been welcomed by stakeholders. Under section 227 of the Victoria Police Act 2013 it is an offence for personnel to access, use or disclose police information when it is not in line with their current duties. So to contextualise this: all police data is stored on their law enforcement assistance program database. Currently an officer who accesses the LEAP database without authorisation, which offenders may do for the purposes of stalking ex-wives or women in general, as was the case in Emma’s situation, will avoid criminal sanctions if they are not charged within 12 months. The problem is that these offences are often only discovered when the relevant officer is being investigated for other or more serious offences.

While the extension is a positive step, it does not really address the issue of poor internal data auditing within Victoria Police. This is 2024, after all. In any other organisation – certainly in our financial and medical institutions – when a person tries to access unauthorised material, there is an immediate alert because this is an unauthorised invasion of privacy. The Victoria Police database, which stores highly sensitive and confidential information, has no such proactive checks. We are forced to rely on police training and the line ‘Our officers are told not to breach the code of conduct’. Well, what could possibly go wrong with such an approach?

Members may recall the long debate that took place last year on the Health Legislation Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023 and the need for proactive data security and auditing in the public health sector. We were assured that it is both entirely possible and absolutely necessary. Well, if it is good enough for health workers, why wouldn’t we want to see that applied to our police officers? So why isn’t it happening? Victoria Police employs state-of-the-art surveillance equipment, including facial recognition, drones and all sorts of high-tech gadgets, but when it comes to the internal monitoring of people’s privacy it is apparently not seen as a priority.

This goes to a broader issue of police accountability in this state. Victoria Police’s own Chief Commissioner of Police has recently acknowledged a rise in the number of police officers facing disciplinary hearings for misconduct ranging from family violence and drink driving to releasing confidential police information. Despite a catalogue of reports and recommendations, including the 2018 parliamentary committee report into police misconduct, the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants, the recommendations of the Yoorrook Justice Commission and the government’s own departmental review of police oversight, which seems to have quietly died sometime in 2022, this government has made no substantial change to the way complaints against police are handled. While IBAC was rightly chastised for its handling of Emma’s case, the fact is IBAC is not set up to be a police complaints body. IBAC handles at most only 2 per cent of all complaints made against police and refers the rest back to Victoria Police for internal investigation.

Legalise Cannabis supports this bill. As I said, it is a step in the right direction and is better than nothing, but it does not go far enough. We are also supporting the Greens amendments, which aim to give some certainty to those Victoria Police employees who make a complaint to IBAC regarding police misconduct that they will not be found in breach of their duties in doing so. Victoria Police need to address the systemic failings within their organisation if they are to maintain the trust and confidence of all Victorians. It should not be left to police to investigate their own. Ultimately Victorians deserve an independent police complaints body.

John BERGER (Southern Metropolitan) (11:10): Today I rise to speak on the Justice Legislation Amendment (Police and Other Matters) Bill 2023. This bill seeks to update and improve disciplinary standards and procedures for Victoria’s brave police men and women. The bill also increases Victoria Police’s capacity to regulate firearms and make administrative enhancements and improves the operation of the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel, or CVEMAP. It will also expand the circumstances where Victoria Police officers are authorised to use vehicle-immobilising devices. The bill addresses many aspects of police discipline but mainly engages with enforcement of the Victoria Police code of conduct. It does this by amending the Victoria Police Act 2013, the Firearms Act 1996, the Fire Rescue Victoria Act 1958, the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003, the Road Safety Act 1986, the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 and the Worker Screening Act 2020.

Before I begin my contribution on the substance of this bill and what amendments it will make, I want to say this: our men and women in blue are incredible. It is important to commend the vital and difficult job that Victoria Police officers and public safety officers do every single day across Victoria. Victoria Police, through its over 20,000 employees, delivers policing services to over 6 million Victorians, with about 14,000 interactions with the public daily. From officers in Southern Metro to those working in single-officer stations in all corners of Victoria they are essential to the preservation of safety in our community, often putting themselves at risk to do so. I have had the privilege of meeting many police officers across Southern Metro and in my community. I am truly lucky to have such fine people protecting them and their safety.

Our police do a very difficult job, but it is essential that Victoria Police have a comprehensive discipline system to maintain the highest standards of integrity. To this effect the Allan Labor government has found it preferable to enhance and affirm the importance of the Victoria Police code of conduct. The bill will amend the police act to enshrine several disciplinary mechanisms, including the capacity of the Chief Commissioner of Police to issue a binding code of conduct for Victoria Police and subsequently establish noncompliance with that code of conduct to be a breach of discipline. This will ensure that our police force is held to a standard of behaviour and conduct that should be expected of our state’s protective services.

To ensure equity and fairness in the prosecution of discipline inquiries, the bill makes alterations to the procedure surrounding medically justified adjournments. In discipline inquiries police officers or PSOs under investigation may request an adjournment on the basis of medical grounds. The officer or PSO requesting the adjournment will of course be required to provide a medical certificate. This is because the officers conducting discipline inquiries are not medically trained and therefore they would be sometimes unable to determine if an adjournment is genuinely required. Currently adjournments can result in delays of more than a year. This is unacceptable in any case, including cases where an officer is suspended with pay. Because of the potential for these delays, it is imperative that cases only be adjourned out of necessity. To address the impact that medically justified adjournments can have on delays to discipline inquiries, this bill will enable officers and PSOs subject to discipline inquiries to produce an independent medical assessment on their capacity to participate in the discipline inquiry.

The police act currently requires that a police officer or PSO who violates the code of conduct or commits a criminal offence be placed on a good behaviour bond. This bill seeks to improve the functioning of good behaviour bonds in the Victoria Police disciplinary system by including a list of conditions that can be imposed as well. The bill includes mechanisms for testing for drugs and alcohol in cases where the conduct that constituted the breach of discipline resulted in a positive test result for drugs or alcohol; the completion of a training, education or professional development program; the completion of a health and wellbeing program; or the undertaking of an action designed to address harm caused by the breach of discipline. The list is not exhaustive and is to be used at the discretion of the chief commissioner. It is also expected that the conditions imposed would align with the nature of the breach of conduct or criminal offence. That is to ensure that the response to the police misconduct is effectively addressed on a case-by-case basis. To this effect, the condition attached alongside a good behaviour bond must be reasonably linked to the conduct of the officer subject to the disciplinary action. Additionally, Victoria Police is expected to take all actions reasonable and necessary to ensure that this occurs. For most bonds and conditions a time limit will be set to a period of 12 months, except for drugs and alcohol testing, which may last for a period of two years. The bill also outlines the actions to be taken in circumstances where the officer or PSO subject to disciplinary action breaches their bond or condition.

This bill will also implement reforms to introduce a more stringent disciplinary code for our police force. It is not unreasonable to expect that our police force is held to a high standard, a standard that I know Victorian police officers will exceed and meet every day. The Victorian police force is dedicated to preserving public safety, and these amendments are being introduced for that exact purpose – for the benefit of the public and for the benefit of the 99 per cent of the Victorian police force that put the uniform on every day to do the right thing. These amendments will ensure that those who fail to recognise the gravity of their appointment are held to the appropriate account.

At this stage, the statute of limitations has played a role in limiting the opportunity for appropriate prosecution of the crime of wrongful or inappropriately accessing, using or disclosing police information. It is important to remember when discussing topics like this that it is in no way reflective of the nature of the police force. Victoria Police is an organisation comprised of brave and selfless individuals who sacrifice their time and safety to protect the community – brave officers like Sergeant Gary Silk and Senior Constable Rodney Miller, heroes in Southern Metro. Silk and Miller were tragically murdered on the job just over 25 years ago and are remembered in a memorial plaque outside Prahran police station just metres from my office. May they rest in peace.

Another amendment within this bill seeks to empower the anti-terrorism and anti-extremism mechanisms within the state. We are lucky in Victoria to have very robust protections against violent extremism, from the federal counterterrorism agencies to our very own Victoria Police and Department of Justice and Community Safety. Victorians can rest easy knowing that every measure is being taken to prevent unnecessary violence. One aspect of the system is deradicalisation programs. Early intervention against radicalisation functions on the basis of acquiring time-critical and sensitive information. The amendments this bill will make to the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 seek to remove barriers to information sharing in relation to cases of individuals who prove a low to medium risk of engaging in terrorism or violent extremism.

This bill also amends several other laws and acts outside the expressed intentions to improve Victoria Police’s code of conduct and disciplinary mechanisms. This bill will amend the Firearms Act 1996 to allow a licensed firearms dealer to receive a firearm from an unlicensed person who does not satisfy the valid exemption. This is in accordance with the national firearms amnesty. Victoria’s firearm controls are world leading. This government is eager to introduce any measure that will help facilitate the procedure of the ongoing national firearms amnesty. Licensed firearm dealers are contributing greatly to the amnesty. This aspect of the bill seeks to clarify the scope of what their role in the amnesty in Victoria is. This should help to improve the ability of each individual licensed firearms dealer to assist in a smooth and successful amnesty to improve community protections and VicPol’s ability to enforce community safety.

This bill makes amendments to powers relating to vehicle-immobilisation devices, or VIDs. At this stage Victoria Police are only permitted to use VIDs as a tool to prevent a driver from escaping custody or arrest and other limited circumstances in which it is necessary to stop a motor vehicle moving. The bill extends the right and capacity of Victoria’s police to deploy the use of VIDs if they reasonably suspect that a person is intending to drive or actively drive a vehicle in such a manner that is likely to cause harm, or more harm, to themselves or any other person, including a police officer. In doing so, police officers will be required to take the necessary steps to inform the individual operating the target vehicle of their intention to deploy the VID. This standard of expected communication effort is also extended to the deployment of the VID and subsequent removal of the VID. Exceptions are held if it is impractical or impossible for the officer or officers involved to do so safely. Both the requirement of suspicion on reasonable grounds and this information are present within the design features of this expanded access to VID. It is important to strike a balance between the right of every Victorian under the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities to freedom of movement, which may in some respects be limited, and the life-saving road safety impacts that the expanded use of vehicle-immobilisation devices will garner. This will ultimately have major benefits and outcomes for the community. If operated incorrectly or recklessly, motor vehicles of any size can be dangerous to individuals, something I have learned all too well from my time as a branch secretary of the mighty Transport Workers’ Union of Victoria. To that effect, it is incredibly important that the police force, which exists to protect the safety of every single Victorian, is given the tools and mandate to do so.

Additionally, the Worker Screening Act and the Child Employment Act 2003 are to be amended to extend the exemption many Victorian police employees are subject to in relation to working with children checks. Currently police custody officers, also known as PCOs, are not exempt from being required to obtain a working with children check, despite being held to the same security vetting requirements as police officers and protective services officers.

This bill will also make amendments to the Fire Rescue Victoria Act, particularly in relation to the transition of staff from the Country Fire Authority to Fire Rescue Victoria. This is in relation to the 2019 reforms of the fire services. The FRV act gives the minister the ability to direct an allocation statement for the rights, liabilities and obligations to be transferred from the CFA to Fire Rescue Victoria. Transferred staff are divided into two categories: those belonging to a specific station and those not. The FRV act currently does not allow for the minister to allocate rights, liabilities and obligations for FRV staff not assigned to a particular station. The bill seeks to ensure that the minister’s abilities are consistent for all employees of Fire Rescue Victoria.

The final amendments made in this bill are to the VCAT act. The bill’s amendments to the VCAT act are minor technical changes that offer clarification of the potentially ambiguous description of the operation of section 77. This is following a recent amendment that extended to the limitation period of federal matters being seen before VCAT. This bill provides clarification that for a matter referred to in the court by way of section 77(3) the court has the power to extend limitation periods, including those not joined to any VCAT hearing before the matter referred. This is due to some confusion in relation to the courts’ power over third parties.

Before wrapping up this speech I would like to say a few things about Victoria Police. We are truly lucky in this state to be protected by some of the hardest working men and women in this state. I have been lucky enough to meet many of the officers across my electorate of Southern Metro, and every time I have been in awe of the commitment that they have to our community. I have met with police officers at stations like Prahran station, right near my office, and over at Boroondara and Camberwell police stations. Thank you to my friend Minister Carbines for coming along with me to chat with frontline workers giving it their all every day to protect our great state and my community.

The Allan Labor government recognises the hard and essential work that our police officers do every day for civilians like us. Rather than gutting and destroying the police force like the opposition’s predecessors did under Jeff Kennett with the sell-off of Victoria’s public services, the Allan Labor government believes in empowering police to do the best that they can do. The Allan Labor government invests in Victoria Police so we can make their job easier. We do not cut funding to make an already dangerous and difficult job harder. It is important to acknowledge that police do more than protect and defend our community. They are also an important outreach into the community. From neighbourhood and safety programs to early intervention programs against youth crime, Victoria Police know that a modern, holistic approach to policing will always result in a safer community.

I would also like to commend police officers across Victoria for their tireless work and invaluable contribution to our greater community. I would also like to thank the police commissioner for the cooperation he has offered in the construction of this bill. I remember from my time at the Transport Workers’ Union that Victoria Police were very helpful and respectful. In short, I am sure that everyone will join with me in commending this bill.

Jeff BOURMAN (Eastern Victoria) (11:25): I will give a very brief contribution. This bill does a number of things which we have covered. It covers a lot of, I guess, disciplinary things to do with the police. No organisation exists in any endeavour that has no misconduct of any sort. I guess in this instance it is tidying up some loose ends. Frankly, some of it is pretty good. I did note one member’s contribution complaining about the lack of police oversight and so on, and then they said that the number of complaints that have been investigated has risen. Clearly if it is rising, things are happening and people are making them. There is a system, and it is working.

But anyway, the main crux of what I want to talk about today is the Firearms Act 1996 changes. Some of them are good. I am flagging an amendment that I will circulate in the committee stage. There is a provision to allow firearms dealers to basically take an unregistered firearm from an unlicensed person to get it out of the system – an amnesty, for want of a better word. This has only been probably, I do not know, two centuries in the making. This should have been done from day one. Any amnesty that gets an illegal firearm out of the community is good. It should always be that way, and I know that other states in this country do not do that. But you are either serious about getting them out of the system or you are not. The part that I will move an amendment to is clause 14, to do with bolt action shotguns. I will have a couple of questions in committee.

There are a lot of other things in this bill. There is something to do with the Road Safety Act 1986 to deploy vehicle-immobilising devices – to hopefully cut down on pursuits – and a whole lot of stuff to do with FRV. With the limited time I have available to me, I will wrap it up there.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Michael Galea): Thank you, Mr Bourman. May I compliment you on your tie as well. I must now interrupt business pursuant to a resolution of the house on 28 November 2023, and I will leave the chair and suspend the sitting. I ask members to make their way to the Assembly chamber for a special sitting to consider a motion for a parliamentary apology to past care leavers.

Business interrupted pursuant to resolution of Council of 28 November 2023.

Sitting suspended 11:28 am until 2:02 pm.