Wednesday, 3 December 2025

 Rachel PAYNE (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:02): 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 Summary Offences Amendment (Begging) Bill 2025.

In my opinion, the Summary Offences Amendment (Begging) Bill 2025, as introduced to the Legislative Council, is compatible with human rights as set out in the Charter. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement.

Overview

The Bill amends the Summary Offences Act 1966 to repeal the offence of begging and gathering alms.

Human rights issues

Right to Life and to Liberty and Security

Section 9 of the Charter provides that every person has the right to life and the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of life. Section 21 of the Charter provides that every person has the right to liberty and security of person and must not be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. ‘Arbitrary’ means unjust or unreasonable in a way that is not proportionate to the legitimate aim sought.

This Bill repeals the offence of begging or gathering alms, that is punishable by up to 12 months imprisonment. In doing so, it repeals a law that undermines the right to liberty for people experiencing poverty who are begging as a life sustaining activity.

The criminalisation of begging is disproportionate and not reasonably necessary to preserve public safety, as people who beg are not inherently a threat to public safety, and existing offences address violent and threatening conduct.

The criminalisation of begging entrenches inequality as people who are experiencing homelessness, long-term unemployment, mental illness, drug or alcohol dependence and violence beg at higher rates. It does not address inequality or poverty and instead attempts to remove it from public view.

This Bill will shift the approach to begging from a criminal justice response to a public health response, which prioritises the safety and wellbeing of people who are begging. For these reasons, I consider that this Bill is compatible with the Charter and promotes the right to life and the right to liberty and security.

Conclusion

I consider that this Bill is compatible with the Charter.

Rachel Payne MP

Member for the South-Eastern Metropolitan Region

Legalise Cannabis Victoria

 Rachel PAYNE (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:03): I move:

That the bill be now read a second time.

Legalise Cannabis Victoria is committed to upholding human rights. Laws that criminalise begging are an untenable breach of those human rights, discriminating against people experiencing poverty.

Jessica Geddes was just 27 years old when she was murdered by her abusive partner – a bright young woman who taught herself to play guitar and piano and had dreams of studying medicine.

Amid housing instability, illicit substance use, and mental health issues, Jessica met Robert.

Several days later they moved in together, and Robert began coercively controlling Jessica and physically, emotionally, financially and verbally abusing her. He also diverted her Centrelink payments into his own bank account.

Jessica would sometimes beg multiple times a day for food, cigarettes and money, telling neighbours that Robert would beat her up if she did not return with what he wanted.

Police received 36 public order reports related to Jessica from 3 May 2019 to the time of her death in November 2020, mostly in relation to her begging. In the uncommon instances police got there before she left, they would advise her not to return. This was despite reports of suspected family violence and concerns for Jessica’s welfare.

State Coroner John Cain’s report on Jessica’s death recommended the Victorian government work with Victoria Police to develop a welfare-orientated response to people who beg, rather than a criminal one.

The report stated: ‘a community-based response to Jessica’s begging (rather than the threat of criminalisation) may have promoted positive engagement and fostered greater interpersonal connection, which can be a significant protective factor against violence and the negative impacts of violence. Instead of being afraid of getting in trouble from police, Jessica could have received referrals to get assistance with housing, substance use, mental/physical health and family violence.’

Following the tragic murder of Jessica Geddes, the number of people charged with begging in Victoria has dropped significantly. From April 2020 to March 2021, 104 people were charged with begging, but the following year it was only 15.

While this is a welcome shift, it does not change the fact that it is still a crime to ask for help in Victoria.

Fines and imprisonment continue to be imposed for the offence of begging. While some people charged with begging get diverted to assistance programs, others end up with fines or further criminalisation where there is a failure to appear at court.

I would like to share the story of Jenny – this is not her real name – shared with me by Justice Connect.

Jenny sought assistance from Justice Connect’s Homeless Law for $5000 in unpaid fines she had incurred while living her life in public.

These included two court-ordered fines for begging totalling $500. Her Newstart income wouldn’t come close to covering them.

Just contacting Homeless Law and coming to an appointment with lawyers was an achievement for Jenny. Her depression and severe anxiety had made accessing services confronting and alcohol dependence made long-term engagement difficult. Jenny had experienced violence from her on-off boyfriend but struggled to end the relationship and often reported assaults by him. Sometimes she self-harmed, or fell and injured herself while intoxicated. Her support worker worked closely with Homeless Law lawyers to support Jenny to address her health and housing issues and safely distance herself from her boyfriend. In the meantime, her fines continued to exacerbate her anxiety.

Obtaining records of Jenny’s unpaid fines proved challenging due to her history of housing insecurity and lack of documentation. Justice Connect’s Homeless Law provided legal support over many months to clarify the state of her infringements. An application to court was eventually made, and a rehearing was held five months later. Jenny received an adjourned undertaking.

We are criminalising people like Jenny for being poor, treating them as a nuisance rather than people in need of support. By doing so we compound financial hardship and cycles of poverty.

Section 49A of the Summary Offences Act 1966 provides that it is an offence to beg or gather alms. Incredibly, this has a penalty of up to 12 months’ imprisonment.

Since 2005, an average of 141 people are charged with begging every year.

This offence originates from vagrancy laws Victoria inherited from the UK’s Vagrancy Act 1824, which criminalises sleeping rough and begging.

These 200-year-old-plus UK laws are expected to be repealed in the coming months.

New South Wales, Western Australia and Tasmania have all decriminalised begging. In fact New South Wales did it almost 50 years ago.

Victoria is increasingly being left behind and if we fail to act, we will only go backwards.

Melbourne council’s new community safety program is aimed at addressing complex on-street issues such as public consumption of alcohol, begging and antisocial behaviour, will be doing so through move-on directions and infringements.

Looking at Melbourne council’s website, it now includes a reporting form for ‘anti-social behaviours such as begging’. You can drop a pin on a map to show where someone is begging, you don’t have to explain any risk and the community safety team of private security guards will be deployed to their location.

While the police response to begging seems to have softened, as long as it remains an offence, people who beg will be targeted by these programs.

As we approach the Christmas period, we are often taught to think about those less fortunate. The reality is this group will only continue to grow as Victorians face increased cost of living.

Shelters are full and people are turned away from homelessness agencies every day.

People beg because they need to. It’s often a last resort and puts people at high risk of being verbally or physically abused.

When this government decriminalised public drunkenness, it recognised that doing so would allow people to access safe and appropriate care, the same is true for begging.

People who are experiencing homelessness, long-term unemployment, mental illness, drug or alcohol dependence and violence are for various reasons, much more likely to beg.

Yet, Victoria is happy to further marginalise our most vulnerable and criminalise a life-sustaining activity. These laws try to hide poverty from view, rather than address it.

Whether or not it is a criminal offence, people will still need money to survive, and yet you are saying to people who beg that it is as much a criminal act as stealing – it’s outrageous.

Our current laws entrench inequality, encourage stigma and prevent people accessing care. It is also simply ineffective at reducing the number of people who beg or addressing underlying causes of begging.

This bill repeals the offence to beg or gather alms.

In doing so, it will shift the approach to begging from a criminal justice response to a public health response, which prioritises the safety and wellbeing of people who beg.

The decriminalisation of begging was suggested in the final report of the inquiry into homelessness in Victoria.

At the time, the committee heard concerns from Victoria Police that repealing the offence could make it more difficult to regulate professional begging, citing an example from some years earlier.

There is no evidence that this extends beyond a tiny minority of cases.

These kinds of activities and anti-social behaviour can adequately be dealt with by alternative charges.

Retaining the offence of begging harms so much more than it helps. These archaic laws waste police resources and are increasingly out of step with other jurisdictions.

I want to acknowledge the work of the Attorney-General on this matter. When I raised this in Parliament, I received a response from the Attorney advising that she had asked the Department of Justice and Community Safety to consider abolishing the offence.

This is a simple legislative change and should be made as soon as possible.

 Lee TARLAMIS (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:12): I move:

That debate be adjourned for two weeks.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned for two weeks.