Wednesday, 21 February 2024

Bills

Bail Amendment (Indictable Offences Whilst on Bail) Bill 2024

Statement of compatibility

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (09:53): I lay on the table a statement of compatibility with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006:

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the Charter), I make this statement of compatibility with respect to the Bail Amendment (Indictable Offences Whilst on Bail) Bill 2024 (the Bill).

It is my opinion that, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Council, is compatible with the human rights contained within the Charter.

This Bill seeks to retain an existing provision of the Bail Act 1977, specifically the crime of committing an indictable offence whilst on bail, which was inserted into the Bail Act 1977 by an amending Act in 2013.

The Bill seeks to prevent the repeal of this offence provision which would otherwise occur pursuant to the Bail Amendment Act 2023 upon its proclamation.

In the event that the offence provision is repealed, the Bill seeks to re-insert it into the Bail Act 1977.

To the extent that the 2013 creation of the offence of committing an indictable offence whilst on bail was compatible with the Charter, this Bill is similarly compatible with the Charter given it seeks to preserve or reimpose the exact same provision.

Based on the foregoing, it is my view that the Bill is compatible with the Charter, as the human rights implications of the effective provisions of the Bill have previously been considered by the Parliament as reasonable and in accordance with Charter obligations.

Evan Mulholland MLC

Member for Northern Metropolitan Region

Second reading

Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (09:53): I move:

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill introduces amendments to the Bail Amendment Act 2023 so that section 30B of the Bail Act 1977 – the offence of committing an indictable offence whilst on bail – is not repealed.

Alternatively, if by the time this bill passes the section 30B offence has already been repealed, this bill will re-create that offence.

The bail offence contained in section 30B is an important part of Victoria’s bail laws and contributes to community safety. Repealing this measure is a backwards step that will needlessly put Victorians at risk by making it easier for repeat offenders to secure bail.

Nevertheless, repealing section 30B is what the Allan Labor government has done through the Bail Amendment Act 2023.

However, while the Bail Amendment Act 2023 has passed the Parliament and received royal assent, it has not yet been proclaimed. Proclamation will occur by default on 25 March 2024 if the government does not do so earlier.

The Parliament therefore has the opportunity to correct this error before it takes effect and weakens Victoria’s bail laws to the detriment of community safety.

The section 30B offence was inserted into the Bail Act in 2013 at the initiative of the then Liberal and Nationals government.

Its effect is twofold.

First, it provides that committing an indictable offence whilst on bail is in and of itself an offence. This reflects the fact that bail is a form of licence for an accused person to remain free in the community pending a court determining the charge or charges against them.

Inherent in bail is the concept that a person accused of a crime is permitted by a bail decision maker to remain in the community until trial under condition that they do not offend.

A person who commits an indictable offence whilst on bail has breached that covenant and it is therefore appropriate that they suffer a penalty under criminal law. Under section 30B the maximum penalty is three months imprisonment or a fine of 30 penalty units.

Second – and more importantly – a breach of section 30B automatically elevates the test for bail that applies to a person charged with an indictable offence.

So, if a person on bail commits an offence that would otherwise attract the ‘unacceptable risk’ test (the lowest test), section 30B means that the ‘show compelling reason’ test (the middle test) will apply instead.

Or if a person on bail commits an offence that would otherwise attract the ‘show compelling reason’ test (the middle test), section 30B means that the ‘show exceptional circumstances’ test (the highest test) will apply instead.

Where a person is charged with an indictable offence that already attracts the highest test for bail (for example, murder) there is no further elevation of the test for bail.

By elevating the test for bail for a bailee who has committed an indictable offence, the Parliament made clear that repeat offenders who breach the community’s trust by committing a serious offence whilst on bail will be dealt with firmly.

A person who has broken their bail covenant by offending should face a higher test to receive bail again.

By abolishing section 30B the Labor government is sending a message that people on bail can offend time and again while facing the same test for bail that they met for the first offence.

Make no mistake – without section 30B, repeat serious offenders in Victoria will find it easier to get bail. This puts the community at risk.

Liberals and Nationals MPs strongly opposed abolishing this offence at the time and indeed tried to pass amendments to prevent this change. The Labor government did not support those amendments.

Now, when serious crime is rising and police stations are closing across Victoria, it is time for the Labor government to admit that it got it wrong.

This bill is the Labor government’s opportunity to fix its mistake and again strengthen bail laws before they are weakened to the detriment of Victorians.

It is acknowledged that to have someone accused of a crime remanded in custody prior to their day in court is, to some extent, a contradiction of the principle of the presumption of innocence.

But it is essential to balance that principle with the safety of the community.

In this instance the government has not got that balance right.

At a time when Crime Statistics Agency data records a 33 per cent increase in residential aggravated burglaries over the 12 months to September 2023 and, under the Labor government, 43 police stations have had their opening hours slashed, it is exactly the wrong time to be weakening bail laws.

I know my colleague Ms Crozier has had some personal events happen to do with aggravated burglaries and has told her story. I know in particular in my electorate we have had police stations like in Epping and Reservoir close. It was only in 2021 or 2020 that there was a $15 million investment in the Reservoir police station, a brand new 24-hour police station. The government even compulsorily acquired three homes to do so. Lisa Neville went there for a big, flashy opening. It was going to be great for the community to have a 24-hour police station. What did they do just a few years later? They made it an 8-hour shopfront. Really, talk about a waste of taxpayers money: make a $15 million investment in the Reservoir police station in order to have a 24-hour police station with all the supports and functions that that police station needed to operate 24 hours, compulsorily acquire three homes and then make it an 8-hour shopfront. Seriously, what a waste of money. They announced it back then, and then with a whimper on a Friday afternoon late last year they announced that a whole bunch of police stations are going to be turned into basically shopfronts. I know the Police Association Victoria are upset about this, and so is any Victoria Police member you speak to.

The government does not seem to care. They do not seem to have a view. It has really got a shameful record that we need to reverse. Community safety is important. I have spoken about criminal justice reform quite a bit. The social licence for criminal justice reform only comes when you put community safety first, when that is the rolled-gold principle of criminal justice reform, and this government does not have that balance right.

This bill reflects a simple principle: if you abuse the privilege of bail by committing further offences, you should face a tougher test to get bail again.

It would be difficult to find many Victorians who would disagree with that proposition.

I urge the Labor government and other members to support this bill and thereby remedy an error which will otherwise weaken Victoria’s bail laws and put the community at risk.

I commend the bill to the house.

Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Services) (10:01): I move:

That debate on this bill be adjourned for two weeks.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned for two weeks.