Wednesday, 27 August 2025

Production of documents

Working with children checks

Georgie CROZIER (Southern Metropolitan) (10:07): I am very pleased to move this motion in Mr Davis’s name. I move:

That this house:

(1) notes that the Premier, the Honourable Jacinta Allan MP, stated on:

(a) 31 July 2025, that ‘… in April of this year I directed the Attorney-General and the Minister for Government Services to undertake a review of the working with children check settings’;

(b) 12 August 2025, that ‘… through the work that was commissioned in April to review the system, there have been strengthened arrangements with the worker-screening unit’;

(c) 14 August 2025, that ‘… we have also, as a result of work taken back in April – work that has been undertaken by the Attorney and the Minister for Government Services – strengthened the worker-screening unit with regard to the working with children check’; and

(2) in accordance with standing order 10.01, requires the Leader of the Government to table in the Council, within 14 days of the house agreeing to this resolution, the review done by the Attorney-General and the Minister for Government Services that was commissioned in April 2025 and any documents used by the Attorney-General and Minister for Government Services for the review that influenced this change to the worker-screening unit and working with children checks.

We had an urgent bill in this house yesterday debating this very issue around working with children checks. We have seen what has happened in this state with the appalling acknowledgement and understanding of the crimes allegedly committed by Joshua Brown, the impact they have had on thousands of children and the thousands of families that have been impacted and the absolute anxiety and concern of every one of those family members, their friends and others, and of those people working in the system, I might add, who are doing the right thing and who have also been very alarmed and concerned by the heinous, vile, criminal acts that have allegedly occurred.

As I said, the urgent bill came in yesterday, and Minister Erdogan was at the table. I questioned Mr Erdogan on a number of issues, including this very point – would the review be made available for the committee – and he was really quite inadequate in the response to that. This is why this documents motion is important. We need to understand why the review that was commissioned in April came about, what sparked that review, and I said this in the house last night when we were debating that bill. In questioning the minister throughout the process in the committee stage, the minister admitted that there are loopholes in the bill – there are still loopholes. I asked the minister: ‘Minister, does this bill today close the loopholes and implement the Ombudsman’s recommendations in full?’ I am referring to the Ombudsman’s findings and recommendations made in September 2022, three years ago. The government failed to act on them then. They did absolutely nothing, despite the Shadow Attorney-General pointing out that we would immediately fix that issue. He made a statement at the time. So we have been on the record about this serious issue that the government has failed to address. I think we need the transparency and understanding of exactly why the government failed and what this review was about, and this is what this document seeks to do, because in the questioning, when I asked the minister that, he responded: ‘Ms Crozier, to answer your question, today’s bill will not close that loophole’.

There were other areas where Minister Erdogan confirmed that the bill that was urgently introduced and debated in both houses yesterday does not close loopholes and does not address very serious issues around working with children checks and around people that are getting through the system. I made the response about Ron Marks and how under the current laws he would still be able to have a working with children check. This is what we are very concerned about, and this is why this documents motion is incredibly important, because clearly something sparked that review in April 2025. I argue that in the interests of transparency and in the interests of every one of those parents who have had a child affected who needed to be tested for STIs because of the vile, dreadful acts of these alleged perpetrators and others that have been charged and convicted, Victorians deserve to understand why the government failed to act and what sparked that review.

Children deserve to be safe, and they have not been safe because of the government’s failures. I would hope that all members would understand the seriousness of this issue. That is why that bill came in yesterday, and that is why the Liberals and Nationals supported the bill. That is why we tried to amend the bill – to strengthen the bill and to close those loopholes which the minister has admitted are still there. I would urge all members to support this motion. The review is there, and the government needs to release it to the Parliament in the interests of transparency, as a matter of urgency.

Michael GALEA (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:13): I rise to speak on notice of motion 1051, which has been put forward by Mr Davis and Ms Crozier today, and affirm that, as per standard practice, the government will not be opposing today’s short-form documents motion. I do appreciate the opportunity to discuss this very important issue. Indeed, as has already been referred to by Ms Crozier, we did have an important bill through this place yesterday, a bill which – as was stated clearly by the minister in fact and by many of those members on this side, including me – is not the final outcome to this problem and a bill that is indeed the first critical step in addressing the most time-sensitive elements and the most critical things that require attending to. Indeed, as the minister and others referred to and as the minister referred to in the committee stage yesterday, there will be further legislation that will be coming through.

Noting that the Weatherill–White review was submitted to government just two Fridays ago and was published in full by the government along with its response last Wednesday, the government has clearly already taken very swift action to address the report’s findings and recommendations. Notably when it comes to recommendation 6, which covers the working with children checks, the Weatherill–‍White report has put forward a proposed timeframe in which it seeks for these recommendations to be implemented, putting aside, momentarily, recommendation 6.5, which touches on the national collaboration that is needed. Whilst the state government has accepted in full every single one of the recommendations from the rapid review, there are a number of those recommendations that either fall under the purview of the Commonwealth or are work that is to be done across all states and territories and the Commonwealth, and the Victorian government has committed itself to enthusiastically working through that process with other jurisdictions.

With regard specifically to 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4, those recommendations which fall squarely within the responsibility of the Victorian government, the rapid review proposed a timeframe of the design and drafting of legislation to be in the immediate phase, which is within three months, and the new legislation and the changes to be implemented within 12 months, which is 12 months from 15 August this year. As members will already be aware, this government has actually committed to a faster timeframe than that in the response to the rapid review, with each of those recommendations being responded to. Indeed as has been touched on, there was the immediate and urgent bill which covered some of those critical areas yesterday. But all of the remaining parts of the legislation, which will acquit recommendations 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4, will be put forward in a bill which will be put to Parliament in October of this year. Not only is that exceeding the 12-month timeframe that has been put forward by the review, but if it passes through the Parliament quickly, and we certainly hope that it does, it is actually meeting that within that two-to-three-month timeframe.

What I think is very important to focus on here is that we have this review. It has put forward very sensible, very good recommendations. It has been processed by government. It is being acknowledged. It was said at the outset that all recommendations would be supported, and that has certainly borne true. With the legislation that I was very happy to see pass this chamber yesterday, we already have a stronger system today, or in a few days time, than we did yesterday, once it receives that royal assent. With the legislation that the government has committed to provide to the Parliament in October, we will then see even stronger reforms in this space, acquitting all of the other things that have been raised by Ms Crozier and by others to address the working with children check system. That is what this government is continuing to focus on, as I believe it rightly should do. Whilst we will not be opposing the motion put forward by Ms Crozier today, I again make the note that this is an important space of work. As Minister Erdogan said in committee stage yesterday, this is an important thing to get right, and that is exactly what we are going to do.

Sonja TERPSTRA (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:18): I also rise to make a contribution on this motion standing in Mr Davis’s name. It is a documents motion, and again the government only has 5 minutes on the clock to respond to something like this. I have listened to Mr Galea’s contribution.

David Davis: You have already had five. You are going to have 10 now.

Sonja TERPSTRA: I know, but it is –

Michael Galea interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: Yes. But look, the position of the government is as our standard position on these things. The government does not oppose documents motions. Nevertheless I was just having a read of the motion and also listening to Mr Galea.

Despite what the characterisations of those opposite might be on this issue in terms of the government’s actions on child safety and the working with children check, there is a clear pathway of actions that the government has taken in response to a whole range of things. We had a bill through this chamber yesterday, but we also have had various ministers take action in various spaces, and that includes the Minister for Children but also the Attorney-General. But I guess the concerning thing about the debate in this space is that those opposite want to continually talk down the safety of the sector where we know that the vast majority of people who work in the sector are very hardworking and dedicated early childhood educators. There are people who really care deeply about the children who are in the early childhood childcare settings, and they are dedicated and hardworking professionals.

What I am noticing about the people who work in the sector right now is how really disappointed and devastated they feel about what has happened in the sector, but also then about how that reflects on them. They have they have been working hard, turning up to work every day caring for our most vulnerable children. So despite the characterisations from those opposite, yes, they have been betrayed as well. It is disappointing that those opposite want to continue to talk down those workers in the sector. Parents do need to have confidence in the sector, and so the actions of this government are clear when it comes to making improvements. Every parent does deserve to know and to trust that when they drop off their child at child care they are safe and protected.

There were some contributions in regard to the bill yesterday which I agreed with. Many, many years ago when I was a young organiser I used to organise in the childcare area.

David Davis: It was a few years ago, wasn’t it?

Sonja TERPSTRA: Yes, that is right. But that was when the sector was not-for-profit. There were no for-profit centres – I am going back some 20-plus years ago. There were no for-profit sectors. There was an incredibly strong regulator who used to turn up and do spot checks, and they were well funded. So of course whenever a private market enters the situation we always have calls for less regulation because it is hard to make a profit et cetera, et cetera.

The bottom line is that there have been changes in the sector over many years, and you can look at the federal government’s involvement in this space as well in terms of the childcare rebate going back to the Morrison years. I am a student of history, so I have seen the changes and I do not necessarily agree with all of the changes that have come, but here we are. And so now we get calls from those opposite that the government has failed, and it is just a little bit opportunistic as of course it always is. Nevertheless, the government moved in April to review our working with children check scheme and update the worker screening regulations. We are supporting that motion. There has been a power of work done in a very quick turnaround – for example, the rapid review that has happened. We have also commissioned that urgent review in early childhood education and care, including the working with children check in Victoria, which is led by Jay Weatherill AO and Pamela White PSM. The rapid review was delivered to government on 15 August, and as has been stated earlier, the government is accepting all 22 of the recommendations around that and will boost funding with a $42 million boost to the sector to ensure that child safety and early childhood education and care settings are safe.

Despite what those opposite might say and their wont to talk down the sector and the workers who work hard and turn up every day to keep our kids safe in that sector, the government is acting on this. Every Victorian was horrified by what happened, and I know as a parent I was deeply distressed by what happened. Anybody who has children was sickened by this. I will leave my comments there.

Motion agreed to.