Thursday, 29 May 2025
Bills
Justice Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2025
Justice Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2025
Second reading
Debate resumed on motion of Harriet Shing:
That the bill be now read a second time.
Enver ERDOGAN (Northern Metropolitan – Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice) (14:25): I thank all members who have contributed to the debate on the Justice Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2025. This bill is largely uncontroversial, and there is broad consensus on most parts of the bill. I do note that the proposed amendment has been a lightning rod for those opposite, but I do hope that we have support of everyone in this chamber for this particular reform also.
As has been stated in the second-reading speech and the debate, this bill implements time-critical reforms – reforms to achieve administrative efficiencies and correct technical errors in legislation. Part 2 amends the Crimes Act 1958 by replacing section 180 on trustee secret commissions; part 3 and part 5, division 1, modernise court procedure; part 4 corrects drafting errors in the Worker Screening Act 2020; and part 5, divisions 2 and 3, addresses more substantive policy issues related to summary appeal reforms. These reforms are critical. They reduce costs and complexity, support court programs and underpin recent budget investments that have already driven a 14 per cent reduction in backlogs last year. This bill will also amend the Victoria Police Act 2013 to clarify the citizenship requirements for senior leadership roles within Victoria Police, including the Chief Commissioner of Police and deputy commissioners.
I would like to circulate the amendments in my name now, noting they are contingent on my instruction motion passing.
Amendments circulated pursuant to standing orders.
Enver ERDOGAN: This is a targeted amendment that will, out of an abundance of caution, ensure that there can be no question of the citizenship requirements of people appointed to the ranks of chief commissioner and deputy commissioners of Victoria Police. As part of the appointment process of the new chief commissioner, the Victorian government has identified a legal rule that suggests that there may be some citizenship requirements for the holder of the office of chief commissioner. As most of us would know, the Victoria Police Act 2013, which is the act which governs appointments to these roles, is currently silent on citizenship requirements. The amendments will put this beyond doubt by making it clear and explicit that Australian citizens, permanent residents, permanent visa holders and special category visa holders can be appointed to the ranks of chief commissioner and deputy commissioners. I would also like to bring to the attention of the chamber that this is currently what applies to police officers at the assistant commissioner level or below. So this is just bringing consistency across the force from below assistant commissioner level all the way up now to the top.
In summation, the bill and amendments seek to make broad improvements to the justice system, and I commend the bill and the amendments to the house.
Motion agreed to.
Read second time.
Instruction to committee
The ACTING PRESIDENT (Gaelle Broad) (14:28): I have considered the amendments on sheet EE11C circulated by Minister Erdogan, and in my view they are not within the scope of the bill. Therefore an instruction motion pursuant to standing order 14.11 is required. I remind the house that an instruction to committee is a procedural motion. I call on the minister to move his instruction motion.
That it be an instruction to the committee that they have the power to consider amendments and new clauses to amend the Victoria Police Act 2013 in relation to the appointment of the Chief Commissioner of Police, deputy commissioners and persons acting as Chief Commissioner of Police or deputy commissioners.
Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (14:28): I am happy to speak on this motion, and we will have more to say in committee. It is usual practice for us to support instruction motions, and we are happy to do so. But I still will say, as I said in my contribution, the process by which this amendment has come to light has been pretty poor, given that the minister knew about this, signed off on this and waited a whole three days to inform us of his decision to attach this amendment to this bill. It is pretty poor that the opposition and all colleagues were treated with such disrespect, and I think again it is emblematic of both the Minister for Police and this entire government, with the carousel of commissioners that they have had and with this bungle that we have seen once again. They had a commissioner they had confidence with one day, and then they did not the next day. They had another commissioner for about 90 days and then did not have a commissioner. They then went on a thorough international search but forgot to dot the i’s and cross the t’s, and now we are left with this bungle from this government. It really goes to show their lack of management and proper leadership when it comes to Victoria Police.
Katherine COPSEY (Southern Metropolitan) (14:30): The Greens will be supporting the instruction motion. We share some concerns about the regrettable situation the government seem to have found themselves in, but we will not stand in the way of facilitating an outcome through the chamber today.
Motion agreed to.
Committed.
Committee
Clause 1 (14:33)
David DAVIS: I will just ask a couple of questions quickly on the amendment that the minister has proposed. I am not going to go on other than to put on record the tawdry process by which this came forward and the lack of engagement with the crossbench and the opposition on this matter, but I am asking a very simple question: why did the government not realise, if there is some issue, much earlier? What was the breakdown in process that resulted in the government not being aware that it needed, apparently, to legislate?
Enver ERDOGAN: I think in my summation I was talking about it. The current Victoria Police Act 2013 is silent, so the silence can obviously be open to different interpretations. We went down this path, we have obviously found someone – an international star – and I guess out of an abundance of caution, before he begins, we have made the judgement, based on advice, that we should be making this amendment so that he can fulfil his duties from late June onwards. I think it is fair to say that the act itself is silent. There is other case law – it is not specific to this scenario, but there is broader case law about the risks involved. I think the government is being proactive, before the new commissioner begins, in taking this action. I can understand those opposite and on the crossbench that have expressed concerns today. I take those concerns on board and I know the government does. But I think going forward, like I said, it is important that we get this change through today.
David DAVIS: Is the government in receipt of, or does it hold, formal advice of some type that says this is a problem, and would the minister make that available to the chamber?
Enver ERDOGAN: I understand that there has been advice provided. I am not at liberty to waive that privilege, but let me just seek some clarification from the box.
I am advised it came via the department to the minister’s office. This issue was raised. I do not have that advice with me at present, but it may be something we could provide at a later date.
David DAVIS: I take on board the minister’s engagement here and his concept that he will provide this, so perhaps ‘a later date’ might be later today before we finish this process, or even before the house rises might be very helpful. Is the minister aware that there have been six former chief commissioners from overseas?
Enver ERDOGAN: I am not aware that there have been six from my preparation for this, but I think it is clear that we are looking at an abundance of caution here. The act itself is silent, so we are being extra careful because I understand the role of chief commissioner is the most important role in the police force and in law enforcement in our state. We are being extra cautious to ensure that there is clarity and there is no confusion. We are being explicit that non-Australian citizens that fit within the special criteria, such as permanent residents, permanent visa holders or special category visa holders, can take on the roles of chief commissioner and deputy commissioner. In the past that may have occurred, but going forward we want to make sure it is crystal clear so there are no risks.
David DAVIS: Just for the record, William Henry Fancourt Mitchell, birthplace England, was chief commissioner in 1854; Charles MacMahon, in 1858, from Ireland; Frederick Charles Standish, from England, in 1880; Hussey Malone Chomley, who I think my colleague mentioned, from Ireland, until 1902; George Steward, from England, between 1919 and 1920; and then the most recent, Alexander Mitchell Duncan, from 1937 through to 1954, from Scotland. I am just –
Members interjecting.
David DAVIS: He was a deputy commissioner. He was not a commissioner.
Members interjecting.
David DAVIS: I take up the point that was made to me by my colleague that Sir Ken Jones was a deputy commissioner too.
Jacinta Ermacora: Effectively it is the same country.
David DAVIS: Not in 1954 it was not. Australian citizenship commenced in 1949, so just to be clear, it was not the same. But either way we have had at least six commissioners from overseas and deputy commissioners, as has been pointed out by my colleague, who are from overseas. Is there any indication that their actions or the legality of what they have done would not stand?
Enver ERDOGAN: I think it is fair to say that our government is forward focused to ensure that we have the settings right for the incoming commissioner and also for potential future deputy commissioners. It is not a goal here today to look at necessarily retrospectivity in terms of the past, but going forward we want to make sure that the amendments achieve an appropriate outcome, which means there is clarity to this issue.
David DAVIS: With respect, it seems bizarre to be indicating that there is some problem with somebody from in this case a Commonwealth country and that there is some difficulty with that when we have had at least six such commissioners and at least one identified deputy commissioner in recent times. This is bizarre advice. How can it be that we suddenly need a special change to ensure that the commissioner is tickety-boo?
Enver ERDOGAN: I have been trying to make it clear that we are forward looking, focused on the future. We are making absolutely certain there are no issues. That is what we are looking toward. The act is silent, so we are saying, ‘Here’s the clarity in the act,’ so no-one can even question the future commissioner’s standing in that regard. I think it is important that we look to the future. A lot of the examples you gave were – some were before Federation, I note. I think it is important that we are forward focused. We have got a commissioner incoming. This reform needs to happen to ensure there is no ambiguity here, and we do not want this tested. That is why we are bringing in these reforms. But I do appreciate your concerns and for sharing them with the chamber.
Katherine COPSEY: I have a question about a different aspect of the bill, and it relates to the delay to the implementation of the de novo reforms. Could you please outline for the chamber the reason for this delay?
Enver ERDOGAN: I thank Ms Copsey for that question on a really important issue. I was Minister for Victim Support up until late last year, so it is an issue I am very familiar with speaking to advocates on. It is something where I know there has been a lot of expectation from victims groups around it coming in. It is fair to appreciate that the court system during COVID and post COVID has obviously had a backlog, and it is something that I touched upon in my summation, going through quite significant changes. But it is clear that, in terms of so much work that is happening in the courts with our bail laws and other priorities, the courts and justice agencies are not necessarily prepared for the commencement this year. To be frank, to allow for the full benefits to be realised we need that focus and allocation of broader resources to the courts to be able to do this work. But there is a very busy agenda at the moment. As you know, there is a lot of change happening. We have got changes in other parts of the courts as well, so it is fair to say that the courts are just not ready at this point in time.
Katherine COPSEY: To make sure I understand, this has arisen out of discussions or requests from the courts themselves in terms of implementation readiness?
Enver ERDOGAN: Yes, that is right. As I said, I take into account that the courts are already in the process of implementing other significant reforms. As we speak there is work going on about bail and changes to youth justice and committal process that the courts are working through in 2025, so it has been brought to the government’s attention, to the Attorney-General’s attention, that these reforms, amongst all that, will not be able to be implemented at this point.
Jeff BOURMAN: First of all, I want to register my irritation that I found out about this from a journalist this morning, but I am not going to flog a dead horse. Minister, you mentioned that there was something to do with common law that was precipitating this. Obviously, I am not expecting to get a clear answer now, but will the minister commit to having the department write to the non-government members and just explain what the basis of this is? I do not have a problem with it being precautionary. I do not have a problem with it being looking forward and all this other stuff, but I would just be very curious as to what is the nature of the concern.
Enver ERDOGAN: That is a very fair request, Mr Bourman. I will make sure that the Minister for Police’s office and the department do write to the crossbench and the opposition to update them on that advice. I understand it has something to do with public office holders, but I will not go into that. Like I said, I do not intend to waive privilege, but I think an explanation of how this came about in more detail – noting especially your history and your passion for the police force and your interest, I totally understand, and I will follow that up with the police minister’s office.
Evan MULHOLLAND: It was good to receive a briefing from the government earlier on this and the need for this and also the process. We found out the minister had signed off on a brief for this to be attached to the legislation on Monday. We found out on Thursday. The Leader of the Government supposedly found out on Thursday as well. Minister, did you also find out late last night about this amendment?
Enver ERDOGAN: Mr Mulholland, I think at this point, as I said, I am looking forward. But if it pleases you, I can confirm I found out yesterday afternoon.
Evan MULHOLLAND: It just confirms I think a failure of the police minister to properly consult with colleagues. If you are aware of something and your office is aware of something on a Monday afternoon and has signed off on a way forward, you would think the minister carrying the bill in the upper house should be given a proper courtesy. And I think the lack of courtesy that has been applied to all colleagues in this Parliament unfortunately applies to government members and ministers as well, and I think that is a shame. What would have happened if this was not picked up and his appointment had been questioned in terms of delegated authority for swearing in of officers? Was the government made aware perhaps of issues that might occur if his appointment was challenged?
Enver ERDOGAN: We are going down a speculative path here, but it is clear that commissioners of police have extraordinary powers. It is a very senior role. And like I said, they are effectively in charge of law enforcement in our state. The police force is led by commissioners, so there are a lot of powers that commissioners have. Potentially you would be able to question all those powers if the ambiguity around citizenship was not resolved, so potentially every decision of the commissioner would be at risk.
Evan MULHOLLAND: This has been tacked on to a bill in the upper house. Obviously the lower house cannot sign off on it for another two or three weeks. That gives quite a short amount of time. Are we sure that this is going to be the last time we have to come back to this issue?
Enver ERDOGAN: I am very confident, Mr Mulholland. I think it is already the case that people below assistant commissioner level can work in the police force. It is quite common, from what I understand, that constables from New Zealand come over and work in Victoria Police. New Zealand and Australia have very similar systems of government, being Commonwealth countries and being such close neighbours and allies. This is really bringing the roles of chief commissioner and deputy commissioner into line with the lower ranks, so it is bringing consistency across the force. We are very confident that we will not need to relitigate these changes going forward.
Evan MULHOLLAND: Just for clarification, does this amendment provide for only New Zealand citizens on a special category visa? Or if a future government decides to do another international search and finds someone from, say, another country like the United States, Canada or somewhere, would this amendment solve that issue as well?
Enver ERDOGAN: The house amendments make crystal clear that it resolves it for a permanent resident as well – a permanent resident of Australia – but also for a person who has a permanent visa or is entitled to be granted a permanent visa. It also resolves it for a New Zealand citizen or someone who is entitled to be granted a special category visa under the Migration Act 1958. If someone comes in via a special category visa, who may be an American or from any other country like the UK et cetera, then these amendments will resolve that issue. I think it would be quite uncommon to probably have someone outside of a Commonwealth country just because of obviously the systems and the way the police force operates.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: If there are no further questions, I will call the minister to move his amendment 1, which tests all his remaining amendments.
Enver ERDOGAN: I move:
1. Clause 1, page 2, after line 10 insert –
“(ea) to amend the Victoria Police Act 2013 in relation to the appointment of the Chief Commissioner of Police, Deputy Commissioners and persons acting as Chief Commissioner of Police or a Deputy Commissioner; and”.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Are there any comments?
Evan MULHOLLAND: Yes, a few. As previously mentioned with this amendment, we have got no issue with Mike Bush. We support the appointment. We deeply regret the carousel of police commissioners that have appeared under this government. The previous one did not last very long. I hope this one will, and I wish Mike Bush really well in his appointment as police commissioner, because we do need to do a lot to turn the police force around in terms of its morale so that we do not have one in five police officers leaving the force. We do need to do a lot to make sure that we are investing in Victoria Police and that when a police commissioner has a frank and fearless conversation with government about investment, they are not rebuffed or rebuked. We need to continue that system of honesty without fear for their position.
We are, as I said, very unhappy with the way that this has come about. In future it will be much more difficult for the government to accuse us of not bringing in an amendment on time. Even if it is perhaps in a Monday government meeting sometimes when we raise that we are going to do something on a Wednesday, at least that is not being done on a Wednesday night for a Thursday sitting – it is a little bit longer. I think that is really poor, and the rushed way in which this is being done is emblematic of the left hand not speaking to the right and emblematic of the dysfunction that goes on within this government when it comes to Victoria Police and the leadership of Victoria Police. As I was talking about earlier, we have a brand new 24-hour police station, built in 2021, in Reservoir, specifically purposed and fitted out to be a 24-hour station, that had its hours reduced to about 8 hours. That police station is around the corner from where we saw some horrific incidents at Northland recently. We will not be opposing this amendment, but we want to make very clear our displeasure with the way this has come about.
Enver ERDOGAN: I think it is important that I did clarify it, and I thank the Minister for Police for his prompt action in this matter. As soon as he became aware of this possibility, he obviously acted and brought it into the Parliament as soon as possible in real terms.
Evan Mulholland interjected.
Enver ERDOGAN: A few days, Mr Mulholland, but we had very important gambling amendment legislation on Tuesday, which I was debating so I was busy, and I represent the police minister in this place. I do note that obviously these processes of recruitment are led by departments. It has clearly been missed by someone in the department. The police minister has promptly acted to rectify it, and so has the government. This can happen in a large department. In this case I am glad that we are at this point and that we have an opportunity to get rid of the ambiguity and provide clarity going forward, because we are future focused. I look forward to Mike Bush beginning. He was a very accomplished commissioner in New Zealand and definitely has a strong global reputation. The Department of Justice and Community Safety, led by the secretary, did undertake an international process to headhunt him, effectively, and bring him here. It is clear that someone of that stature wanting to work in Victoria signals the strong position that our state is in.
Katherine COPSEY: The Greens will not be opposing the amendment, but I also want to take the opportunity to remark that it is less than ideal, the process that has brought this amendment to us today. We appreciate that things do happen right up to the minute in this chamber, and we often have everybody making best efforts to circulate amendments, which can be complex to get drafted and can arise through consideration of the bill. We completely understand that. We thank the minister for making best efforts in this circumstance to bring parties up to speed when he could and to share the reasoning for the amendment with the chamber, but I do want to remark that it is not the first time that we have had quite significant house amendments come at the very last minute to bills in this place. What is particularly worrying to me is that they have tended to come quite frequently on justice portfolio bills, where we have had extremely complex pieces of legislation being altered in a very short timeframe, seemingly as a result of decisions, I would say, outside the minister’s control and where we have had other parts of government dictating justice policy. To me it points to a recurring issue in this government that it seems very, very reactive on the topic of justice. When we see these quite panicked and reactive moves made by the Premier, which then flow on to our work in this chamber, it leaves the chamber in a really difficult position where we are unable to execute the level of diligence that I think each of us would want to bring to our roles.
That goes to the ability to go and speak to stakeholders about really significant changes. The example that is clearest in my mind is obviously the bail laws. I think this is a very worrying pattern that I have seen played out through this term of the Parliament, and it is really, frankly, not on. We have got to see better preparedness for the crossbench to be able to perform its role, the opposition to perform its role and frankly the ministers to be able to perform their role as well. What really stood out to me about the bail debate was the complete sidelining of advocacy and stakeholder engagement that had gone on for many, many years, which was then steamrolled by what appeared to me to be a politically motivated backflip from the Premier, which upended years of heartfelt advocacy that people had put hard work and hard emotional work into to bring to this chamber’s attention. It is tangential to today’s debate, but I think it is relevant, because we are once again seeing a last-minute change that the chamber is forced to debate at short notice without really any realistic opportunity to go out and speak to people about what is a significant piece of legislation.
Enver ERDOGAN: I want to thank Ms Copsey for her sincere approach to this issue. She is right – her concerns are more tangent to other legislation. I am not sure if she is foreshadowing a future debate for the next tranche of legislation to come. But in relation to this, I want to thank the whole crossbench for their cooperation and their understanding of the importance of this change. This one is a relatively straightforward change. I feel this is one that, like I said, is completely out of the control of the police minister; a process led by the department – an international recruitment process. Now we have been made aware we have brought it in this week, but I do understand Ms Copsey’s good faith feedback in relation to some of the broader justice reforms and her feelings around them. I might say I do not necessarily agree with some of it, but I do respect it. That is coming from a sincere place, so thank you, Ms Copsey.
Amendment agreed to; amended clause agreed to; clauses 2 to 19 agreed to.
New division heading and new clauses (15:01)
Enver ERDOGAN: I move:
2. Insert the following New Division after Division 3 of Part 5 –
‘Division 4 – Amendment of Victoria Police Act 2013
19A Appointment of Chief Commissioner
After section 17(1) of the Victoria Police Act 2013 insert –
“(1A) The Chief Commissioner must be –
(a) an Australian citizen; or
(b) a permanent resident within the meaning of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 of the Commonwealth; or
(c) a person who has a permanent visa or is entitled to be granted a permanent visa under the Migration Act 1958 of the Commonwealth; or
(d) a New Zealand citizen who has a special category visa or is entitled to be granted a special category visa under the Migration Act 1958 of the Commonwealth.”.
19B Appointment of Acting Chief Commissioner
After section 18(1) of the Victoria Police Act 2013insert –
“(1A) An Acting Chief Commissioner must be –
(a) an Australian citizen; or
(b) a permanent resident within the meaning of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 of the Commonwealth; or
(c) a person who has a permanent visa or is entitled to be granted a permanent visa under the Migration Act 1958 of the Commonwealth; or
(d) a New Zealand citizen who has a special category visa or is entitled to be granted a special category visa under the Migration Act 1958 of the Commonwealth.”.
19C Appointment of Deputy Commissioners
After section 21(1) of the Victoria Police Act 2013 insert –
“(1A) A Deputy Commissioner must be –
(a) an Australian citizen; or
(b) a permanent resident within the meaning of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 of the Commonwealth; or
(c) a person who has a permanent visa or is entitled to be granted a permanent visa under the Migration Act 1958 of the Commonwealth; or
(d) a New Zealand citizen who has a special category visa or is entitled to be granted a special category visa under the Migration Act 1958 of the Commonwealth.”.
19D Appointment of Acting Deputy Commissioner
After section 22(1) of the Victoria Police Act 2013 insert –
“(1A) An Acting Deputy Commissioner must be –
(a) an Australian citizen; or
(b) a permanent resident within the meaning of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 of the Commonwealth; or
(c) a person who has a permanent visa or is entitled to be granted a permanent visa under the Migration Act 1958 of the Commonwealth; or
(d) a New Zealand citizen who has a special category visa or is entitled to be granted a special category visa under the Migration Act 1958 of the Commonwealth.”.’.
New division heading and new clauses agreed to; clause 20 agreed to.
Long title (15:01)
Enver ERDOGAN: I move:
3. Long title, after “Act 2021” insert “, the Victoria Police Act 2013”.
Amendment agreed to; amended long title agreed to.
Reported to house with amendments, including amended long title.
That the report be now adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Report adopted.
Third reading
That the bill be now read a third time.
Motion agreed to.
Read third time.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Pursuant to standing order 14.28, the bill will be returned to the Assembly with a message informing them that the Council have agreed to the bill with amendment.