PARLIAMENT OF VICTORIA

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

(HANSARD)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

FIFTY-NINTH PARLIAMENT

FIRST SESSION

TUESDAY, 3 AUGUST 2021

Internet: www.parliament.vic.gov.au/downloadhansard

By authority of the Victorian Government Printer

The Governor The Honourable LINDA DESSAU, AC The Lieutenant-Governor The Honourable KEN LAY, AO, APM

The ministry

Premier ...... The Hon. DM Andrews, MP Deputy Premier, Minister for Education and Minister for Mental Health The Hon. JA Merlino, MP Attorney-General and Minister for Resources ...... The Hon. J Symes, MLC Minister for Transport Infrastructure and Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop ...... The Hon. JM Allan, MP Minister for Training and Skills, and Minister for Higher Education .... The Hon. GA Tierney, MLC Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development and Minister for Industrial Relations ...... The Hon. TH Pallas, MP Minister for Public Transport and Minister for Roads and Road Safety .. The Hon. BA Carroll, MP Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change, and Minister for Solar Homes ...... The Hon. L D’Ambrosio, MP Minister for Child Protection and Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers ...... The Hon. LA Donnellan, MP Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services and Minister for Equality ...... The Hon. MP Foley, MP Minister for Ports and Freight, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, and Minister for Fishing and Boating ...... The Hon. MM Horne, MP Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice and Minister for Victim Support ...... The Hon. NM Hutchins, MP Minister for Local Government, Minister for Suburban Development and Minister for Veterans ...... The Hon. SL Leane, MLC Minister for Water and Minister for Police and Emergency Services .... The Hon. LM Neville, MP Minister for Industry Support and Recovery, Minister for Trade, Minister for Business Precincts, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, and Minister for Racing ...... The Hon. MP Pakula, MP Assistant Treasurer, Minister for Regulatory Reform, Minister for Government Services and Minister for Creative Industries ...... The Hon. DJ Pearson, MP Minister for Employment, Minister for Innovation, Medical Research and the Digital Economy, and Minister for Small Business ...... The Hon. JL Pulford, MLC Minister for Multicultural Affairs, Minister for Community Sport and Minister for Youth ...... The Hon. RL Spence, MP Minister for Workplace Safety and Minister for Early Childhood ...... The Hon. I Stitt, MLC Minister for Agriculture and Minister for Regional Development ...... The Hon. M Thomas, MP Minister for Prevention of Family Violence, Minister for Women and Minister for Aboriginal Affairs ...... The Hon. G Williams, MP Minister for Planning and Minister for Housing ...... The Hon. RW Wynne, MP Cabinet Secretary ...... Ms S Kilkenny, MP

OFFICE-HOLDERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FIFTY-NINTH PARLIAMENT—FIRST SESSION

Speaker The Hon. CW BROOKS

Deputy Speaker Ms JM EDWARDS

Acting Speakers Ms Blandthorn, Mr J Bull, Mr Carbines, Ms Connolly, Ms Couzens, Ms Crugnale, Mr Dimopoulos, Mr Edbrooke, Ms Halfpenny, Ms Kilkenny, Mr McGuire, Ms Richards, Mr Richardson, Ms Settle, Ms Suleyman, Mr Taylor and Ms Ward

Leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party and Premier The Hon. DM ANDREWS

Deputy Leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party and Deputy Premier The Hon. JA MERLINO

Leader of the Parliamentary Liberal Party and Leader of the Opposition The Hon. MA O’BRIEN Deputy Leader of the Parliamentary Liberal Party The Hon. LG McLEISH

Leader of The Nationals and Deputy Leader of the Opposition The Hon. PL WALSH Deputy Leader of The Nationals Ms SM RYAN

Leader of the House Ms JM ALLAN

Manager of Opposition Business Mr KA WELLS

Heads of parliamentary departments Assembly: Clerk of the Legislative Assembly: Ms B Noonan Council: Clerk of the Parliaments and Clerk of the Legislative Council: Mr A Young Parliamentary Services: Secretary: Mr P Lochert

MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FIFTY-NINTH PARLIAMENT—FIRST SESSION

Member District Party Member District Party Addison, Ms Juliana Wendouree ALP Maas, Mr Gary Narre Warren South ALP Allan, Ms Jacinta Marie Bendigo East ALP McCurdy, Mr Timothy Logan Ovens Valley Nats Andrews, Mr Daniel Michael Mulgrave ALP McGhie, Mr Stephen John Melton ALP Angus, Mr Neil Andrew Warwick Forest Hill LP McGuire, Mr Frank Broadmeadows ALP Battin, Mr Bradley William Gembrook LP McLeish, Ms Lucinda Gaye Eildon LP Blackwood, Mr Gary John Narracan LP Merlino, Mr James Anthony Monbulk ALP Blandthorn, Ms Elizabeth Anne Pascoe Vale ALP Morris, Mr David Charles Mornington LP Brayne, Mr Chris Nepean ALP Neville, Ms Lisa Mary Bellarine ALP Britnell, Ms Roma South-West Coast LP Newbury, Mr James Brighton LP Brooks, Mr Colin William Bundoora ALP Northe, Mr Russell John Morwell Ind Bull, Mr Joshua Michael Sunbury ALP O’Brien, Mr Daniel David Gippsland South Nats Bull, Mr Timothy Owen Gippsland East Nats O’Brien, Mr Michael Anthony Malvern LP Burgess, Mr Neale Ronald Hastings LP Pakula, Mr Martin Philip Keysborough ALP Carbines, Mr Anthony Richard Ivanhoe ALP Pallas, Mr Timothy Hugh Werribee ALP Carroll, Mr Benjamin Alan Niddrie ALP Pearson, Mr Daniel James Essendon ALP Cheeseman, Mr Darren Leicester South Barwon ALP Read, Dr Tim Brunswick Greens Connolly, Ms Sarah Tarneit ALP Richards, Ms Pauline Cranbourne ALP Couzens, Ms Christine Anne Geelong ALP Richardson, Mr Timothy Noel Mordialloc ALP Crugnale, Ms Jordan Alessandra Bass ALP Riordan, Mr Richard Vincent Polwarth LP Cupper, Ms Ali Mildura Ind Rowswell, Mr Brad Sandringham LP D’Ambrosio, Ms Liliana Mill Park ALP Ryan, Stephanie Maureen Euroa Nats Dimopoulos, Mr Stephen Oakleigh ALP Sandell, Ms Ellen Melbourne Greens Donnellan, Mr Luke Anthony Narre Warren North ALP Scott, Mr Robin David Preston ALP Edbrooke, Mr Paul Andrew Frankston ALP Settle, Ms Michaela Buninyong ALP Edwards, Ms Janice Maree Bendigo West ALP Sheed, Ms Suzanna Shepparton Ind Eren, Mr John Hamdi Lara ALP Smith, Mr Ryan Warrandyte LP Foley, Mr Martin Peter Albert Park ALP Smith, Mr Timothy Colin Kew LP Fowles, Mr Will Burwood ALP Southwick, Mr David James Caulfield LP Fregon, Mr Matt Mount Waverley ALP Spence, Ms Rosalind Louise Yuroke ALP Green, Ms Danielle Louise Yan Yean ALP Staikos, Mr Nicholas Bentleigh ALP Guy, Mr Matthew Jason Bulleen LP Staley, Ms Louise Eileen Ripon LP Halfpenny, Ms Bronwyn Thomastown ALP Suleyman, Ms Natalie St Albans ALP Hall, Ms Katie Footscray ALP Tak, Mr Meng Heang Clarinda ALP Halse, Mr Dustin Ringwood ALP Taylor, Mr Jackson Bayswater ALP Hamer, Mr Paul Box Hill ALP Theophanous, Ms Katerina Northcote ALP Hennessy, Ms Jill Altona ALP Thomas, Ms Mary-Anne Macedon ALP Hibbins, Mr Samuel Peter Prahran Greens Tilley, Mr William John Benambra LP Hodgett, Mr David John Croydon LP Vallence, Ms Bridget Evelyn LP Horne, Ms Melissa Margaret Williamstown ALP Wakeling, Mr Nicholas Ferntree Gully LP Hutchins, Ms Natalie Maree Sykes Sydenham ALP Walsh, Mr Peter Lindsay Murray Plains Nats Kairouz, Ms Marlene Kororoit ALP Ward, Ms Vicki Eltham ALP Kealy, Ms Emma Jayne Lowan Nats Wells, Mr Kimberley Arthur Rowville LP Kennedy, Mr John Ormond Hawthorn ALP Williams, Ms Gabrielle Dandenong ALP Kilkenny, Ms Sonya Carrum ALP Wynne, Mr Richard William Richmond ALP

PARTY ABBREVIATIONS ALP—Labor Party; Greens—The Greens; Ind—Independent; LP—Liberal Party; Nats—The Nationals.

Legislative Assembly committees

Economy and Infrastructure Standing Committee Ms Addison, Mr Blackwood, Ms Couzens, Mr Eren, Ms Ryan, Ms Theophanous and Mr Wakeling.

Environment and Planning Standing Committee Ms Connolly, Mr Fowles, Ms Green, Mr Hamer, Mr McCurdy, Mr Morris and Ms Vallence.

Legal and Social Issues Standing Committee Mr Battin, Ms Couzens, Ms Kealy, Ms Settle, Mr Southwick, Ms Suleyman and Mr Tak.

Privileges Committee Ms Allan, Mr Carroll, Mr Guy, Ms Hennessy, Mr McGuire, Mr Morris, Mr Pakula, Ms Ryan and Mr Wells.

Standing Orders Committee The Speaker, Ms Allan, Mr Cheeseman, Ms Edwards, Mr Fregon, Ms McLeish, Ms Sheed, Ms Staley and Mr Walsh.

Joint committees

Dispute Resolution Committee Assembly: Ms Allan, Ms Hennessy, Mr Merlino, Mr Pakula, Mr R Smith, Mr Walsh and Mr Wells. Council: Mr Bourman, Ms Crozier, Mr Davis, Ms Mikakos, Ms Symes and Ms Wooldridge.

Electoral Matters Committee Assembly: Mr Guy, Ms Hall and Dr Read. Council: Mr Erdogan, Mrs McArthur, Mr Meddick, Mr Melhem, Ms Lovell, Mr Quilty and Mr Tarlamis.

House Committee Assembly: The Speaker (ex officio), Mr T Bull, Ms Crugnale, Ms Edwards, Mr Fregon, Ms Sandell and Ms Staley. Council: The President (ex officio), Mr Bourman, Mr Davis, Mr Leane, Ms Lovell and Ms Stitt.

Integrity and Oversight Committee Assembly: Mr Halse, Ms Hennessy, Mr Rowswell, Mr Taylor and Mr Wells. Council: Mr Grimley and Ms Shing.

Public Accounts and Estimates Committee Assembly: Ms Blandthorn, Mr Hibbins, Mr Maas, Mr Newbury, Mr D O’Brien, Ms Richards, Mr Richardson and Mr Riordan. Council: Mr Limbrick and Ms Taylor.

Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee Assembly: Mr Burgess, Ms Connolly and Mr R Smith. Council: Mr Gepp, Ms Patten and Ms Watt.

CONTENTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS Acknowledgement of country ...... 2517 CONDOLENCES John Francis McGrath, AM ...... 2517 BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Standing and sessional orders ...... 2517 ANNOUNCEMENTS Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission ...... 2521 BILLS Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021 ...... 2521 Introduction and first reading ...... 2521 Statement of compatibility ...... 2521 Second reading ...... 2524 Building Amendment (Registration and Other Matters) Bill 2021 ...... 2526 Introduction and first reading ...... 2526 Social Services Regulation Bill 2021 ...... 2526 Introduction and first reading ...... 2526 Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Bill 2021 ...... 2527 Introduction and first reading ...... 2527 Statement of compatibility ...... 2527 Second reading ...... 2532 PETITIONS St Arnaud ambulance station ...... 2535 COMMITTEES Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee ...... 2535 Alert Digest No. 9 ...... 2535 DOCUMENTS Documents ...... 2536 BILLS Child Wellbeing and Safety (Child Safe Standards Compliance and Enforcement) Amendment Bill 2021 ...... 2539 Mutual Recognition (Victoria) Amendment Bill 2021 ...... 2539 Council’s agreement ...... 2539 Transport Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2021 ...... 2539 Council’s amendments ...... 2539 Child Wellbeing and Safety (Child Safe Standards Compliance and Enforcement) Amendment Bill 2021 ...... 2540 Education and Training Reform Amendment (Protection of School Communities) Bill 2021 ...... 2540 Mutual Recognition (Victoria) Amendment Bill 2021 ...... 2540 Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Cross-boundary Greenhouse Gas Titles and Other Matters) Amendment Bill 2021 ...... 2540 Royal assent ...... 2540 Liquor Control Reform Amendment Bill 2021 ...... 2540 Occupational Health and Safety and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 ...... 2540 Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021 ...... 2540 Racing Amendment Bill 2021 ...... 2540 Appropriation ...... 2540 MOTIONS General business ...... 2540 BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Program ...... 2541 MEMBERS STATEMENTS Senior Sergeant Ian Jones ...... 2549 COVID-19 ...... 2549 Coburg RSL ...... 2550 Natimuk Lake weir ...... 2550 VicRoads licence testing ...... 2550 COVID-19 ...... 2551 Loddon childcare services ...... 2551 Tweddle Child and Family Health Service ...... 2551 Climate change ...... 2552 Homelessness Week ...... 2552

Homelessness Week ...... 2552 Warrandyte electorate transport infrastructure ...... 2552 Jessica Bennetts ...... 2553 Frankston electorate ...... 2553 COVID-19 vaccinations ...... 2553 COVID-19 ...... 2553 Utility relief grant scheme ...... 2554 Ron Jordan ...... 2554 Banyule Community Health ...... 2554 Professor David Lindenmayer...... 2554 Cranbourne youth advisory committee ...... 2555 Georgia Griffith ...... 2555 Box Hill electorate schools ...... 2555 The Orchard Providore ...... 2555 Power saving bonus program ...... 2556 Mordialloc electorate level crossing removals ...... 2556 COVID-19 ...... 2556 Nicole-Hazel Parulan ...... 2557 Altona electorate schools ...... 2557 BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Orders of the day ...... 2557 BILLS Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021 ...... 2558 Second reading ...... 2558 MEMBERS Minister for Prevention of Family Violence ...... 2562 Absence ...... 2562 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS COVID-19 ...... 2562 Ministers statements: level crossing removals ...... 2563 COVID-19 ...... 2564 Ministers statements: Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission ...... 2565 COVID-19 ...... 2566 Ministers statements: level crossing removals ...... 2566 Rental support ...... 2567 Ministers statements: mental health in schools program ...... 2567 Government performance ...... 2568 Ministers statements: business support...... 2569 CONSTITUENCY QUESTIONS Ripon electorate ...... 2570 Bayswater electorate ...... 2570 Lowan electorate ...... 2571 Hawthorn electorate ...... 2571 Rowville electorate ...... 2571 St Albans electorate ...... 2571 Melbourne electorate ...... 2572 Wendouree electorate ...... 2572 Brighton electorate ...... 2572 Burwood electorate...... 2572 BILLS Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021 ...... 2573 Second reading ...... 2573 MOTIONS Budget papers 2021–22 ...... 2594 ADJOURNMENT Caulfield electorate safety ...... 2617 Bus route 626 ...... 2617 Princes Highway east ...... 2618 Boronia train station ...... 2618 Kunyung Road, Mount Eliza, land rezoning ...... 2619 Pascoe Vale electorate early childhood education facilities ...... 2619 Flood plain harvesting ...... 2620 eStore Logistics ...... 2621 Residential Tenancies Regulations 2021...... 2621 Creative industries sector ...... 2621 Responses ...... 2622

CONTENTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2517

Tuesday, 3 August 2021

The SPEAKER (Hon. Colin Brooks) took the chair at 12.02 pm and read the prayer. Announcements ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY The SPEAKER (12:03): We acknowledge the traditional Aboriginal owners of the land on which we are meeting. We pay our respects to them, their culture, their elders past, present and future, and elders from other communities who may be here today. Condolences JOHN FRANCIS MCGRATH, AM The SPEAKER (12:03): Members, I wish to advise the house of the death of John Francis McGrath, AM, member of the Legislative Assembly for the district of Warrnambool from 2 March 1985 to 17 September 1999. I kindly ask members to rise in their places as a mark of respect to the memory of the deceased. Members stood in their places. The SPEAKER: Thank you, members. I will convey a message of sympathy from the house to the relatives of the late John McGrath. Business of the house STANDING AND SESSIONAL ORDERS Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop) (12:05): I move, by leave:

That so much of standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow the following arrangements to come into effect immediately and to remain in place until 6 August 2021: Order of business (1) The order of business is: Tuesday Formal business Statements by members Government business Question time—2.00 pm Government business continued Wednesday Formal business Statements by members Statements on parliamentary committee reports Government business Lunch break and cleaning in the Chamber—1.00 pm to 2.00 pm Question time—2.00 pm Government business continued Matter of public importance—4.00 pm Government business continued

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 2518 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Thursday Formal business Statements by members Government business Lunch break and cleaning in the Chamber—1.00 pm to 2.00 pm Question time—2.00 pm Government business continued. (2) The processes for interruptions under Sessional Orders 2 and 3(4) apply at the times set out in paragraph (1). Time of meeting (3) Unless otherwise ordered, the House will meet on Wednesday at 9.35 am. Cleaning in the Chamber (4) The Speaker may order additional breaks to facilitate cleaning in the Chamber. Face masks in the Chamber (5) Members must wear face masks in the Chamber except when they have the call to speak or if an exception applies. Lower public galleries deemed part of Chamber and reduced numbers of members to assist with physical distancing (6) The lower public galleries are included as part of the Legislative Assembly Chamber at all times other than when a division is taking place under paragraph (12). (7) Subject to paragraphs (11) and (12), the House will be composed of the Chair and no more than 29 other members, being: (a) 13 from the Government, eight from the Opposition, one Greens member and two independent members on the floor of the Chamber; and (b) three from the Government and two from the Opposition in the lower public galleries. (8) Except as provided for in paragraphs (11) and (12), if more members than those listed in paragraph (7) vote in a division, the Clerk will not count their vote. Quorum (9) The House gives the Chair further discretion in ringing the bells to form a quorum under SO 29, provided the Chair is confident that a quorum is present within the parliamentary precinct. (10) If, under paragraph (9) and SO 29(1), the bells are rung to form a quorum, the provisions under paragraph (7) are suspended until a quorum is formed. (11) If, under SO 29(2), there is found not to be a quorum during a division: (a) the provisions under paragraph (7) are suspended; (b) the bells must be rung for a further four minutes; (c) the Chamber will be composed of the Chair and no more than 40 other members, being 23 from the Government, 13 from the Opposition, one Greens member and three independent members for the remainder of the sitting day; and (d) if more members than those listed in paragraph (c) vote in the division, the Clerk will not count their vote. Divisions (12) For questions relating to the passage of bills on the government business program, the provisions of paragraph (7) are suspended and divisions will take place as follows: (a) the Chair will direct that the lower public galleries be cleared for the duration of the division; (b) members will vote in up to four voting groups; (c) for each voting group: (i) no more than 24 members, in addition to the Chair, the Leader of the House and Manager of Opposition Business (or their representatives), will be permitted into the Chamber; (ii) the Chair will direct that the doors be locked and state the question being voted on;

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2519

(iii) the Chair will ask members who are voting ‘aye’ to stand in their place and, in turn, will ask members who are voting ‘no’ to stand in their place; (iv) the Clerk will count the votes and the Chair will announce the number of votes cast for the ‘ayes’ and ‘noes’ in that group; (v) subject to subparagraph (e), all members except the Chair must then leave the Chamber; (vi) the Chair will then ask the Clerk to ring the bells for one minute to call members to the Chamber for the next voting group, or to resume the make up of the Chamber as set out in paragraph (7), as required; (d) subject to subparagraph (e), members will only be permitted to enter the Chamber once for each division and any member present in the Chamber must vote; (e) the Leader of the House and Manager of Opposition Business, or their representatives, may remain in the Chamber for the entirety of the division, but can only stand to vote in one group; and (f) at the conclusion of the four voting groups, the Chair will announce the result of the division. Register of opinion on division questions (13) If a division has taken place, a member not in attendance for the division can register their opinion on the question: (a) any members wishing to do so must notify the Clerk in writing of their opinion (either ‘aye’ or ‘no’) by no later than one hour after the division has been completed; and (b) any such opinion will be published, separately from the results of the vote, in Hansard and the Votes and Proceedings. Remote participation (14) Members may participate in debate remotely using an audio link or audio visual link as follows: (a) the Chair must be satisfied that the quality of the audio link or audio visual link allows the Chair to verify the identity of that member and for the member to participate; (b) a member participating remotely is not counted for the purposes of a quorum and may not vote; (c) members may only participate remotely to speak on: (i) motions; (ii) bills, including consideration in detail; (iii) members’ statements; (iv) statements on parliamentary committee reports; (v) question time—to ask questions only; (vi) grievance debates; (vii) debates on a matter of public importance; (viii) adjournment debates—to raise a matter only; (ix) a personal explanation; (d) members participating remotely may only speak when given the call, must comply with all the usual rules of debate and may not: (i) refuse leave; (ii) respond to questions without notice, make ministers’ statements or respond to matters raised in the adjournment debate; (iii) call the Chair’s attention to the state of the House; (iv) take, or speak on, a point of order unless it is taken by another member during their speech or relates to the answer to a question they have asked; (v) move a motion (except an amendment to a motion or bill when they have the call); (vi) interject; (vii) chair the debate; (e) members participating remotely may circulate amendments to bills under SO 64;

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 2520 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

(f) in order to assist members participating remotely, the Chair will use a formal call list to allocate the call for each debate where practical and members wishing to participate remotely may seek the call by: (i) informing their whip, or the whip’s representative, who will inform the Chair in advance— for a Government or Opposition member; (ii) informing the Clerk, who will inform the Chair in advance—for any other member; (g) when a member participates remotely, the Chair may exercise all their usual powers to control the debate; (h) the Chair is given any additional powers necessary to facilitate the smooth running of the House and/or to address any technical issues, including but not limited to: (i) stopping the clock; (ii) returning to a member’s contribution; (iii) reordering business; and (i) the Speaker may issue guidelines about remote participation. Incorporation of speeches (15) Members may incorporate their speeches for any of the following items of business considered by the House that day: (a) bills on the government business program; (b) substantive motions; (c) members’ statements; (d) statements on parliamentary committee reports; (e) matter of public importance; (f) constituency questions; and (g) adjournment matters. (16) Members must submit their speeches for incorporation by the following deadlines: (a) for any bill on the government business program, they must email their speech to the Clerk by the time set down for consideration of that bill under the government business program; or (b) for all other items of business listed in paragraph (15), they must email their speech to the Clerk by the adjournment of the House each day. (17) For all items of business listed in paragraph (15), except for bills and substantive motions, the Clerk will accept matters up to the number usually given in the House minus any matters verbally given in the House each day, and as allocated between the parties and independents in accordance with the call lists approved by the Speaker. (18) Incorporated speeches for bills and motions will be published in Hansard— (a) for bills, after the relevant second reading speeches made in the House (if any) and before the minister’s reply (if any); (b) for substantive motions, after the relevant speeches made in the House (if any) and before the mover’s reply (if any); and (c) for all other items of business listed in paragraph (15), after the relevant speeches made in the House (if any). (19) If any matter contains unbecoming expressions or does not comply with the rules of debate, the Speaker may direct that the matter be removed or amended before it is published. Motion agreed to.

ANNOUNCEMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2521

Announcements INDEPENDENT BROAD-BASED ANTI-CORRUPTION COMMISSION The SPEAKER (12:05): I wish to advise the house that on 13 July 2021 and 20 July 2021 I administered to Kylie Kilgour and Stephen Farrow respectively—the deputy commissioners of the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission—the affirmation required by section 31 of the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission Act 2011. Bills COMMERCIAL TENANCY RELIEF SCHEME BILL 2021 Introduction and first reading Mr PAKULA (Keysborough—Minister for Industry Support and Recovery, Minister for Trade, Minister for Business Precincts, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Racing) (12:06): I move:

That I introduce a bill for an act to temporarily empower the making of regulations to modify the application of the law of Victoria in relation to certain commercial leases and licences and for other purposes. Motion agreed to. Mr WALSH (Murray Plains) (12:06): I ask the minister for a brief explanation. Mr PAKULA (Keysborough—Minister for Industry Support and Recovery, Minister for Trade, Minister for Business Precincts, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Racing) (12:06): The Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021 will provide rent relief and protection to small commercial tenants that are continuing to face significantly reduced turnover because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The commercial tenancy relief bill is consistent with the original commercial tenancy relief scheme, with some minor changes. Eligibility criteria have been updated to take account of the fact that there is no longer a JobKeeper scheme at the commonwealth level, that being a key eligibility criterion previously. The 2021 CTRS will provide support for small businesses that have a turnover under $50 million and can demonstrate a decline in turnover of at least 30 per cent. Read first time. Mr PAKULA: Under standing order 61(3)(b) I advise the house that the other parties and Independent members have been provided with a copy of the bill and a briefing in accordance with the standing order. I therefore move:

That this bill be read a second time immediately. Motion agreed to. Statement of compatibility Mr PAKULA (Keysborough—Minister for Industry Support and Recovery, Minister for Trade, Minister for Business Precincts, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Racing) (12:09): In accordance with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 I table a statement of compatibility in relation to the Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021.

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 Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021 (the Bill). In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with the human rights protected by the Charter. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement. Overview of the Bill The Bill introduces a new Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme, based on the benefits and protections of the Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme introduced in 2020, to ease financial hardship faced by some commercial tenants as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BILLS 2522 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Human rights issues The Bill engages the following human rights under the Charter: • property rights (section 20) • the right to privacy (section 13) • the right to a fair hearing (section 24). For the following reasons, I am satisfied that the Bill is compatible with the Charter and, if any rights are limited, those limitations are reasonable and demonstrably justified having regard to the factors in section 7(2) of the Charter. Protecting commercial tenants who are experiencing hardship from the economic impact of COVID-19 The Bill enables the making of regulations to provide rent relief for eligible commercial tenants experiencing financial hardship due to the impact of COVID-19. In doing so, it reintroduces the scheme established under Part 2.2 of the COVID-19 Omnibus (Emergency Measures) Act 2020 to implement the principles of a mandatory code of conduct announced by National Cabinet in April 2020, with some changes to ensure that the scheme is adapted to the current circumstances. The provisions will apply in respect of all eligible leases, which are retail leases and non retail commercial leases and licences that are prescribed under regulations. The Bill authorises the Governor in Council to make a broad range of regulations altering rights and obligations under eligible leases to respond to the ongoing impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes the power to make regulations prohibiting the termination of an eligible lease; changing or limiting the exercise of rights of landlords under eligible leases; exempting a tenant or landlord from having to comply with an eligible lease or certain other laws or agreements; modifying the operation of an eligible lease; modifying the application of certain statutes and the common law in relation to an eligible lease; and imposing new obligations on landlords or tenants under an eligible lease. Further, regulations may be made in relation to disputes between landlords and tenants about matters relating to an eligible lease (such as requiring landlords and tenants to participate in mediation arranged by the Small Business Commission). The Bill also allows regulations to be made conferring a power on the Small Business Commission to make binding orders directing landlords to give specified rent relief to tenants under eligible leases, and with respect to the process and requirements for applying for, making, amending, revoking and enforcing such orders. The Bill also allows regulations to be made which confer jurisdiction on VCAT to hear and determine disputes about non compliance with a binding order, and to review the making, amendment or revocation of such a binding order. The Minister for Small Business may only recommend that regulations be made under these provisions if the Minister is of the opinion that the regulations are reasonably necessary for responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Bill confers relevant functions on the Small Business Commission in relation to facilitating dispute resolution between landlords and tenants, and monitoring and enforcing the regulations. The Bill also authorises the Governor in Council to make regulations conferring further functions and powers on the Small Business Commission. Under the Bill, the State is not liable to compensate any person for loss, damage or injury of any kind suffered by the person as a result of, or arising out of, the making of regulations under these provisions. Regulations made under this Part of the Bill may have retrospective effect to a day not earlier than 28 July 2021. Property rights Section 20 of the Charter provides that a person must not be deprived of their property other than in accordance with law. ‘Property’ under the Charter includes all real and personal property interests recognised under the general law, relevantly including contractual rights, leases and debts. A ‘deprivation’ of property may occur not just where there is a forced transfer or extinguishment of title, but where there is a substantial restriction on a person’s use or enjoyment of their property. However, the right to property will only be limited where a person is deprived of property ‘other than in accordance with the law’. For a deprivation of property to be ‘in accordance with the law’, the law must be publicly accessible, clear and certain, and must not operate arbitrarily. A broad, discretionary power capable of being exercised arbitrarily or selectively may fail to satisfy these requirements. The provisions in the Bill, which provide for the making of regulations that would enable alterations to existing property and contractual rights under eligible leases and prevent their enforcement, may in some

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2523

cases amount to a deprivation of property. The power to make regulations conferring a binding power on the Small Business Commission with regard to ordering rent relief may similarly affect the right to property. However, any deprivation of property will be in accordance with law. While the power to make regulations under the Bill is a broad discretionary power, it is provided for a clear purpose—to counteract the significant economic impacts of COVID-19. Further, there are procedural protections to ensure against arbitrary or inappropriate use of regulation making powers, as the regulations must be reasonably necessary to respond to COVID-19 and are disallowable by Parliament. Further, the Bill also allows for regulations to be made authorising VCAT to conduct merits review of any decision to issue a binding order, which will provide for an additional layer of accountability in the making of any order. Finally, in line with normal Subordinate Legislation Act 1994 requirements, the responsible Minister will be required to consider the impact of the regulations on Charter rights when making recommendations to the Governor in Council. As any deprivation of property will be in accordance with the law, I consider that the right to property is not limited by the provisions. Right to privacy Section 13(a) of the Charter provides that a person has the right not to have their privacy, family, home or correspondence unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with. An interference will be lawful if it is permitted by a law which is precise and appropriately circumscribed, and will be arbitrary only if it is capricious, unpredictable, unjust or unreasonable, in the sense of being disproportionate to the legitimate aim sought. The Bill authorises the making of regulations which in some circumstances may affect the right to privacy. In particular, the Bill may affect the private decisions that individuals are able to make in relation to how they deal with their property (for example, by preventing a person from terminating a lease, or extending an existing lease, where the person may have wished to use that property for other purposes). However, to the extent that the right to privacy may be affected, any interference will be neither arbitrary nor unlawful. The regulation-making power is established for the clear purpose of addressing serious financial hardship caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, will only apply to eligible leases as defined in the Bill and regulations, and will have effect for only a limited time. I therefore consider that the provisions are compatible with the right to privacy. Right to a fair hearing Section 24 of the Charter provides that a party to a civil proceeding has the right to have the proceeding decided by a competent, independent and impartial court or tribunal after a fair and public hearing. The right generally encompasses the established common law right of each individual to unimpeded access to the courts of the State, and may be limited if a person faces a procedural barrier to bringing their case before a court. The right will not be engaged, however, by a provision that substantively changes the law so that a cause of action no longer exists. The Bill provides that no compensation is payable by the State in relation to loss, damage or injury arising as a result of regulations made under these provisions. However, in my view, this provision changes substantive rights and liabilities; it does not affect the procedure by which a court is to determine such rights. The right to a fair hearing is therefore not engaged. The Bill authorises the making of regulations that require landlords or tenants who are in dispute about any matter relating to an eligible lease to participate in mediation arranged by the Small Business Commission before commencing proceedings before VCAT or a court. However, any such regulations must not require landlords or tenants who have already commenced relevant court or VCAT proceedings to participate in mediation, or prevent parties from commencing court proceedings in relation to that dispute at any time. The right to a fair hearing for persons with existing proceedings on foot is therefore not limited by these provisions. Further, for persons seeking to commence fresh proceedings, such persons will still be able to commence proceedings if mediation is unsuccessful. As such, any regulation imposing mandatory mediation process would not limit access to the courts. The Bill also authorises the making of regulations requiring landlords and tenants who are in dispute about a matter relating to an eligible lease to get leave of a court to commence a proceeding in relation to the dispute. This may affect how the right to a fair hearing is realised, but does not limit the right, as individuals will still have access to the courts. Further, insofar as the Bill empowers the making of regulations having retrospective effect, and such regulations may also apply to existing court proceedings, they may also be said to engage the right to a fair hearing. However, any regulations will only relate to a change in the substantive law, rather than the procedures to be applied in the course of any determination or the nature of the tribunal itself. As a consequence, they will not limit the right to a fair hearing. For this reason, in my view the fair hearing right is not limited by this Bill.

BILLS 2524 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Conclusion For the reasons set out above, I consider that the Bill is compatible with the Charter. THE HON MARTIN PAKULA, MP Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events Minister for Racing Minister for Industry Support and Recovery Minister for Trade Minister for Business Precincts Second reading Mr PAKULA (Keysborough—Minister for Industry Support and Recovery, Minister for Trade, Minister for Business Precincts, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Racing) (12:09): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time. I ask that my second-reading speech be incorporated into Hansard. Incorporated speech as follows: The past year has presented ongoing challenges to Victoria’s small businesses as the state fought successive waves of COVID-19. Despite the impact of the pandemic, I am still amazed by the resilience and strength of Victorian small business operators, many of whom have managed to create and grow new business opportunities during this time. In fact, in the year to June 2020 over 19,000 net new small businesses were created in Victoria, the highest number of any state or territory. There have been many stories of growth, often, over the past year, built out of adversity. Unfortunately, despite this resilience, many of Victoria’s small businesses are not yet out of the woods. Victoria and the world continue to grapple with the challenges of the pandemic, and the Government understands the profound effect that successive lockdowns have had on our small businesses. Victoria’s small businesses deserve our support. Over the past year I have stood here many times to outline the support the Victorian Government has provided to small businesses as the state has fought successive waves of COVID-19. We have provided over $7 billion in direct economic support to businesses over the course of the pandemic, including more than $1 billion in the last few months. Our Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme has played a significant part in helping many small businesses survive to this point, providing a strong framework for small commercial tenants and their landlords to negotiate rent relief. The Government understands that many small businesses are yet to recover and require further support and protection. Many are trying to balance lockdown restrictions with having to pay deferred rent. While in many cases landlords and tenants are negotiating in good faith, we are also aware that this is not happening in all instances. The impact of COVID-19 has extended longer than was originally envisaged and it has become apparent that the need for a formal framework for landlords and tenants to negotiate rent relief agreements will be required until we emerge from the other side of this pandemic. So the Government is proud to be acting decisively to back our small businesses as they emerge from lockdown by reintroducing a Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme. The reintroduction of this important scheme will ease pressure on many businesses by providing rent relief for eligible tenants. Recognising the importance of landlords, the Government will be providing additional support to landlords that do the right thing by their eligible tenants. This Bill will enable regulations to be made to reintroduce a Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme. I will be the responsible Minister for the Bill’s reforms. The scheme will apply retrospectively from the date of announcement, and this temporary legislation will be repealed on 30 April 2022. As announced, the Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme will operate from 28 July 2021 to 15 January 2022. Similar to the previous scheme, the 2021 Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme will provide support to small businesses with a turnover under $50 million that have suffered a decline of at least 30 per cent in their turnover. With the Commonwealth Government’s JobKeeper Program no longer in place, tenants will be able to demonstrate their eligibility by providing a standard letter from their accountant.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2525

The scheme will provide protections for many small businesses, with landlords not able to evict a tenant for non-payment of rent unless the parties have attempted mediation. While it is Government’s expectation that tenants will continue to meet their rental obligations where possible, a commercial tenant may not be evicted for non-payment of rent without first attempting mediation through the Victorian Small Business Commission. Rent increases will also remain suspended during the extension. It is our expectation that most commercial tenants and landlords will continue to work together to reach agreements that will best assist the ongoing survival of businesses. Where the landlord or tenant cannot reach agreement, either party may refer the matter for free mediation by the Victorian Small Business Commission. The Government commends the many landlords and tenants that have participated in negotiations in good faith and reached agreements to ensure that as many businesses as possible survive the impact of COVID-19. That is good for tenants, and good for landlords. The Government has an expectation that both tenants and landlords will continue to do the right thing and negotiate fairly and in good faith under the new scheme. The new scheme will enable VCAT to take into account the behaviour of both parties when considering a dispute. This will include whether they have communicated with each other and participated in negotiations and mediations. Tenants that are eligible have an obligation to request rent relief and VCAT will be able to consider whether the tenant has paid rent during the period of negotiations in line with their request for rent relief, and has continued to make payments as agreed. Rent relief is not automatic. The Government has endeavoured to make the application process as streamlined as possible, noting that information requests to tenants should be as minimal as possible to support their applications. In most instances a valid letter from a tenant’s accountant will be sufficient to demonstrate a decline in turnover, and it is the Government’s expectation that landlords will accept this in good faith and provide rent relief in proportion to that decline, with a minimum of 50 per cent waived. It is important to note that compliance with the regulations is mandatory, and landlords have obligations to respond to requests for rent relief. Similar to the previous scheme, this Bill also enables the making of regulations to enable the VSBC to make an order where this is considered fair and reasonable in all the circumstances. It is intended that the VSBC would use these additional powers to resolve disputes between the parties, in particular, where a tenant or landlord is consistently failing to respond to VSBC pre-mediation requests to negotiate in good faith. At the same time, this is not an opportunity for the big end of town to improve their bottom line. Nor is it a scheme that allows tenants to walk away from their contractual obligations. This Bill is about helping businesses survive through a process of compromise and burden- sharing. It’s about protecting livelihoods and the Victorian economy. The Victorian Small Business Commission has helped many small businesses and landlords through the pandemic negotiate and mediate on fair rent relief outcomes. Up to 17 July 2021, the VSBC had received 17,990 COVID-19 related enquiries, with over 3,300 eligible disputes lodged under the CTRS. Of these, over 3,200 cases have been finalised with over 1,200 finalised prior to mediation and a similar number finalised through mediation. Mediation has had an overall success rate of 84.6 per cent. I am immensely grateful to the staff and mediators of the Commission who have worked through the significant increase in demand over the past year. Likewise, I am also thankful for those parties, both small businesses and landlords, that have engaged through the Commission to make fair agreements during this time. If a tenant makes a request for rent relief during the operation of the regulations, it is the Government’s intent that they will be able to receive free mediation support from the VSBC following the end of the regulations. The Government is also acutely aware that many tenants have accrued significant amounts of deferred rent through the first scheme, and that tenants will need to carefully consider the financial implications of additional deferred rent taking into account their specific circumstances. The new regulations will include an ability for a tenant to pause their payments on previously deferred rent if they require further rent relief to enable their business to survive through this period. The Government is also aware that some tenants have had to renew leases during the past year, and deferred rent might now apply to a previous lease. The Government intends that if the deferred rent is in relation to a previous lease of the same premises then repayments will be able to be paused if an eligible tenant has requested rent relief under the latest scheme. The proposed Bill includes clauses disapplying certain requirements of the Subordinate Legislation Act 1994 (SL Act) for regulations to be made under the proposed amendments. In particular, the requirements for consultation and completion of a regulatory impact statement (RIS) are disapplied. This has not been done lightly. Inclusion of these clauses is required because of the strong public interest in having support for small commercial tenants in place as soon as possible. In balancing the strong public interest of operationalising a scheme promptly with the need for appropriate scrutiny of laws and regulations by the Parliament, the proposed Bill (including the SL Act disapplication clauses) has been drafted to have limited operation and the reforms will be repealed on 30 April 2022, apart from some transitional provisions that are necessary to be retained.

BILLS 2526 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Should a scheme continue to be required beyond 30 April 2022, the Government will bring a future Bill to the Parliament to enable more permanent laws and regulations to be made. This is consistent with the approach the Government has taken with other COVID-19 specific laws that the Parliament has considered, and the important responsibility the Parliament has in overseeing the State’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. I look forward to seeing both landlords and tenants continuing to work together respectfully to ensure fair outcomes in good faith, as we have seen most businesses do over the past year. Working together will help all parties get through the pandemic in the best possible condition, to enable growth as we emerge from the pandemic. The re-establishing of the commercial tenancy relief scheme acknowledges that while we have made much progress, there will continue to be challenges for businesses in coming months. We must continue to carry on with this vital work until the COVID-19 crisis is behind us, to ensure future growth and opportunities for businesses around Victoria. I commend the Bill to the house. Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (12:09): I move:

That the debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to and debate adjourned. Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day. BUILDING AMENDMENT (REGISTRATION AND OTHER MATTERS) BILL 2021 Introduction and first reading Mr WYNNE (Richmond—Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing) (12:10): I move:

That I introduce a bill for an act to amend the Building Act 1993 and the Domestic Building Contracts Act 1995 and for other purposes. Motion agreed to. Mr WELLS (Rowville) (12:10): I ask the minister for a brief explanation. Mr WYNNE (Richmond—Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing) (12:10): I thank the opposition. This bill will enable retail landlords to recover costs associated with the maintenance of essential safety measures from tenants under a retail lease located within a retail shopping centre that does not fall under the definition of a retail premises lease in the Retail Leases Act 2003. Secondly, the bill progresses implementation of a registration and licensing scheme for building trades, introducing a new and proportionate pathway for registration specifically for subcontractors, correspondingly limiting the functions and responsibilities of subcontractors relative to head contractors—so that is the whole relationship between head contractor and subcontractor which will be clarified by this bill—and strengthening and improving the registration and licensing framework, including by adding flexibility to the scheme. Read first time. Ordered to be read second time tomorrow. SOCIAL SERVICES REGULATION BILL 2021 Introduction and first reading Mr DONNELLAN (Narre Warren North—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers) (12:12): I move:

That I introduce a bill for an act to establish the social services regulator and the worker and carer exclusion scheme and for other purposes. Motion agreed to. Mr WALSH (Murray Plains) (12:12): I ask the minister for a brief explanation, please.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2527

Mr DONNELLAN (Narre Warren North—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers) (12:12): The reforms in the bill will strengthen the regulatory framework for social services by establishing a new social services regulator to monitor and enforce compliance, promote the safe delivery of social services and protect the rights of service users to minimise risks of avoidable harm caused by abuse or neglect in connection with the delivery of social services. Read first time. Ordered to be read second time tomorrow. JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS REPORTS AMENDMENT BILL 2021 Introduction and first reading Ms HUTCHINS (Sydenham—Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice, Minister for Victim Support) (12:13): I move:

That I introduce a bill for an act to amend the Judicial Proceedings Reports Act 1958 in relation to certain sunsetting provisions, to provide for victim privacy orders and for other purposes. Motion agreed to. Ms STALEY (Ripon) (12:13): I ask for a brief explanation of the bill. Ms HUTCHINS (Sydenham—Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice, Minister for Victim Support) (12:13): The Judicial Proceedings Reports Act 1958 requires reporting back on sunsetting provisions. As part of the work that has been undertaken by the Attorney-General in consulting around matters in relation to victim support, in particular victims of sexual assault who have passed away, those provisions are looking to be amended through this, and I commend her on the work that she has done in consulting victims. Read first time. Ms HUTCHINS: Under standing order 61(3)(b) I advise the house that the other parties and Independent members have been provided with a copy of the bill and a briefing in accordance with the standing orders. I therefore move:

That the second reading be done immediately. Motion agreed to. Statement of compatibility Ms HUTCHINS (Sydenham—Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice, Minister for Victim Support) (12:16): In accordance with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 I table a statement of compatibility in relation to the Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Bill 2021.

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Charter), I make this Statement of Compatibility with respect to the Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Bill 2021 (Bill). In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with human rights protected by the Charter. I base my opinion on the reasons outlined in this statement. Overview The Bill will amend the Judicial Proceedings Reports Act 1958 (JRPA) to provide that the publication prohibition in section 4 of the JPRA (which makes it an offence to publish details likely to identify a person as a victim of a sexual offence or alleged offence) ceases upon the death of that person. This will allow the families of deceased victims and others, including media, to legally publish details that identify the deceased person as a victim of sexual offending. The Bill will also introduce a new mechanism to allow persons close to a deceased sexual offence victim, such as a family member, to apply for a court order restricting or prohibiting the publication of identifying

BILLS 2528 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

details about the deceased victim (a ‘victim privacy order’), to prevent undue distress. This is in recognition of the fact that for some people, whether for personal, cultural or religious reasons, ongoing privacy is important, and publication of a deceased victim’s identity would cause profound distress. Such an order would only be made in exceptional circumstances, where the court is satisfied that the particular circumstances make it necessary to displace the relevant public interests in for example, open justice, free communication and disclosure of information. The Bill will provide scope to expand the victim privacy order scheme to victims of other offences in future, through regulations. Human Rights Issues The Bill engages the following rights under the Charter: • The right to privacy and reputation (section 13) • Freedom of expression (section 15) • Aboriginal cultural rights (section 19(2)) • The right to a fair hearing (section 24) • The right to liberty (section 21) • The right to be presumed innocent (section 25(1)) These rights are variously engaged by the two primary aspects of the Bill, which are addressed in turn. Ending the publication prohibition upon death Freedom of expression (section 15) Section 15 of the Charter provides that every person has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information of all kinds. Section 15 also provides that special duties and responsibilities attach to this right, such that it may be subject to lawful restrictions reasonably necessary to respect the rights and reputations of other persons, or for the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morality. The existing publication prohibition in section 4 of the JPRA restricts the right to freedom of expression by prohibiting the publication of any matter that is likely to identify a person as a victim of a sexual offence, or alleged sexual offence (‘identifying details’). Such restriction is reasonably necessary to protect the privacy rights of victim-survivors and encourage the reporting of sexual offences to police. The Bill will reduce the existing restriction to freedom of expression in the JPRA by providing that the prohibition ends when the victim dies. As a result, it will be lawful to publish identifying details immediately upon the death of a sexual offence victim, subject to any other restrictions or prohibitions on publication. This promotes the right to freedom of expression by allowing family and friends to speak about the offending against the deceased victim without fear of committing an offence. It will also permit the media to immediately report on sexual assault-homicides, which helps raise awareness of sexual and gender-based violence, enhances public safety, and may assist police with investigating these crimes. Right to privacy and reputation (section 13) Section 13 of the Charter provides that a person has the right to not have their privacy, family, home or correspondence unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with, and not to have their reputation unlawfully attacked. The right to privacy is broad and protects values such as the individual and social identity, and autonomy and inherent dignity, of a person and their interest in their personal and social sphere. An interference will be lawful if it is permitted by a law which is precise and appropriately circumscribed. An interference is considered to be arbitrary where it is capricious, unpredictable, unjust or unreasonable, in the sense of being disproportionate to the legitimate aim sought. The existing JPRA publication prohibition makes it an offence to publish identifying details, subject to certain exceptions and defences. The offence aims to protect the privacy of victim-survivors of sexual offences, to encourage reporting of sexual offences to police and prosecution of these crimes. The Bill will not change this privacy protection for living victim-survivors. The Bill will provide that the publication prohibition does not apply to deceased victims of sexual offending. This will not engage section 13 of the Charter in relation to deceased victims, because human rights relate to those who are living. However, the Bill may engage section 13 of the Charter in respect of others. Allowing the publication of a deceased victim’s identity may impact upon the privacy and reputation of the victim’s family and friends. For example, publishing the deceased victim’s name and photo may identify the victim’s family members. Any such interference with privacy will be lawful and reasonable because: • The purpose of the JPRA publication prohibition is to encourage the reporting to police and prosecution of sexual offences. These purposes are not as relevant when the victim has died.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2529

• Protecting a deceased victim’s identity may reinforce the myth that there is something shameful in being a victim of a sexual offence. Deceased victims of other (non-sexual) crimes can already be publicly identified, and the Bill will ensure comparable treatment for deceased victims of sexual offences, which will help reduce the stigma surrounding sexual offending. • The Bill will allow family and friends of deceased victims to apply for a victim privacy order to prevent publication of the deceased victim’s identity where publication would cause undue distress to the applicant. The court must take into account any views of the deceased victim that were expressed during that person’s lifetime, if known. Successful applicants will be able to tailor their victim privacy order appropriate to their unique circumstances and experiences. In this way, the Bill ensures that the privacy of a deceased victim’s loved ones can be protected where a Court determines that the particular circumstances make it necessary to displace the public interest, such as the principles of free communication, open justice and disclosure of information. Cultural rights (section 19(2)) Section 19(2) recognises that Aboriginal people hold distinct cultural rights and they must not be denied the right to enjoy their identity and culture, the right to maintain language and kinship ties; and the right to maintain their spiritual, material and economic relationship with the land and waters. The Bill may engage these rights by making it clear that identifying details may be published immediately upon the death of a sexual offence victim, including a deceased Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person. Common Aboriginal cultural norms concerning deceased Aboriginal persons include restrictions on the use of names and images of a deceased person during a period of mourning (which varies from community to community) and the modification of an Aboriginal person’s name following their death. Any limitation on these rights is demonstrably justified for the following reasons: • There is no automatic privacy protection for deceased Aboriginal victims of non-sexual offences. The protection provided by the JPRA is limited—it only applies to the publication of information likely to identify a person as a sexual offence victim (rather than preventing the identification of the person generally, for example, publishing their name or image). • The application of the automatic JPRA publication prohibition to living sexual offence victims is warranted as it is designed to encourage the reporting to police and prosecution of these offences (which are notoriously under-reported). This rationale is no longer relevant when the sexual offence victim has died. • As discussed below, the victim privacy order provides an alternative and targeted way by which Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander persons may seek to protect their cultural rights (in relation to norms concerning deceased Aboriginal persons) including via interim victim privacy orders which may be applied for immediately upon the death of a victim of a sexual offence. The victim privacy order scheme ensures the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander persons may be balanced against open justice principles (of free communication, open justice and disclosure of information) also protected under the Charter. The victim privacy order scheme Right to privacy and reputation (section 13) Section 13 of the Charter provides that a person has the right not to have their privacy unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with. An interference will be lawful if it is permitted by a law which is precise and appropriately circumscribed. An interference is considered to be arbitrary where it is capricious, unpredictable, unjust or unreasonable, in the sense of being disproportionate to the legitimate aim sought. The Bill promotes the right to privacy for those close to a deceased victim of sexual offending, such as family members, by providing a mechanism to apply to a court for a victim privacy order to avoid undue distress that may be caused by public identification of the deceased victim as a victim of sexual offending. The Bill may limit the right to privacy and reputation for offenders or alleged offenders by requiring a court to consider evidence of their alleged offending against the deceased victim. Any interference is considered to be lawful and reasonable for the purposes of section 13 as it is permitted by the Bill for the specific and proportionate purpose of allowing the court to determine whether a victim privacy order is required to prevent undue distress to an applicant. Further proportionality is afforded by the requirement that an order may only be made when it is in the public interest to do so. Freedom of expression (section 15) Section 15(2) of the Charter provides that a person has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas. This right is, however, subject to internal qualifications set out in section 15(3), which provide for lawful restrictions reasonably necessary to respect

BILLS 2530 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

the rights and reputations of other persons, or for the protection of national security, public order, public health or public morality. Victim privacy orders will restrict freedom of expression, in that they will restrict or prohibit persons, including media, from publishing details likely to identify a deceased person as a victim of a sexual offence or alleged sexual offence. However, this restriction is reasonably necessary to protect the privacy of those close to deceased victims for the purposes of section 15(3) and is demonstrably justified as a reasonable limit for the purposes of section 7(2), for the following reasons: • The purpose of the restriction—the avoidance of undue distress to a person close to a deceased victim of sexual offending—is of considerable importance. Significant distress may occur if the deceased victim is publicly identified as a victim of sexual offending against their wishes. • The restriction is reasonably necessary to protect the privacy of those close to deceased victims. • The victim privacy order mechanism will not operate as a general prohibition on reporting crimes—it will only operate in relation to the identifying details of deceased sexual offence victims protected by an order. Further, an order only applies for a maximum of 5 years, with a right to apply to extend which ensures regular judicial assessment of competing interests. • A victim privacy order is likely to be made only in limited circumstances. An order cannot be made if another appropriate mechanism is available to the applicant (for example, a suppression order under the Open Courts Act, or a statutory prohibition or restriction under another Act). Further, a court will only be able to make an order if satisfied that the potential distress to the applicant in publishing the deceased victim’s identifying details outweighs the relevant public interests, for example, in open justice, free communication and disclosure of information. This is intended to be an appropriately high bar, and likely to be met in only limited circumstances. The requirement for judicial evaluation of matters, including the relevant public interests, ensures that the restriction on the right to freedom of expression is reasonably necessary. The ability of a court to make an interim victim privacy order without determining the merits of the application is also reasonable and justified. Such a power to make interim orders is necessary in a context where an immediate order is needed (such as where the publication prohibition under the JPRA has ended due to the victim dying, and family or friends want ongoing privacy protection for the victim’s identity). A similar provision is in the Open Courts Act 2013. Moreover, the Bill provides that the court must hear the substantive application as a matter of urgency. Cultural rights (section 19(2)) As discussed above, section 19(2) recognises that Aboriginal people hold distinct cultural rights and they must not be denied certain rights, including the right to enjoy their identity and culture. The victim privacy order mechanism would be an avenue for the protection of Aboriginal cultural rights. A member of the deceased Aboriginal person’s family (broadly defined in the Bill to include relationships that have cultural recognition as being ‘like family’ in the deceased person’s community) or other person close to the deceased victim could apply for an order where publication of the deceased’s identifying details would cause undue distress, for example, because it would infringe cultural norms. The Bill also allows the court to make interim orders to provide immediate protection of a deceased victim’s identity, in urgent situations. Fair Hearing (section 24) Section 24(1) of the Charter provides that a person charged with a criminal offence or a party to a civil proceeding has the right to have the charge or proceeding decided by a competent, independent and impartial court or tribunal after a fair and public hearing. Section 24(2) of the Charter permits a court to exclude persons from all or part of a hearing if permitted to do so by a law. The Bill engages this right in various ways. Fair hearing A victim privacy order application will be a civil proceeding. The Bill provides that the court must not consider the offender’s or alleged offender’s views in determining whether to make, confirm, vary or revoke a victim privacy order or interim victim privacy order. This may impact on an alleged offender’s right to a fair hearing in terms of procedural fairness. Any such limitation is reasonable and justified, as the right to a fair hearing must be balanced with the interests that victim privacy orders seek to protect. These orders seek to protect those close to a deceased victims of sexual offending from undue distress where circumstances warrant such protection. The considerable trauma and distress that might be caused to a person close to a deceased victim by the offender or alleged offender

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2531

participating in a hearing would risk undermining the very purposes of the proposed scheme. This is fortified by the high bar for the making of the order, including the requirement that it be necessary to displace the relevant public interest. The alleged offender’s right to a fair hearing is also relevant in the context of any subsequent criminal proceedings commenced after a victim privacy order is made. The existence of an order might have reputational consequences for an alleged offender (for example, by suggesting that an alleged crime did occur). To manage potential impacts on alleged offenders, the victim privacy order scheme includes the following safeguards: • There is no requirement for the court to make findings that an offence occurred before it can make a victim privacy order. The court needs only to determine that an applicant is a person with a sufficient interest. • The applicant must disclose all material facts and the court must be satisfied on the basis of evidence or sufficient credible information that is satisfactory to the court, that the ground for making the order is established. • The court must take into account any risk that the applicant may be using the application, proceeding or the victim privacy order to perpetrate family violence, or that the application or proceeding is vexatious. This would include the risk that a person is seeking a victim privacy order to damage an alleged offender’s reputation. • If another mechanism is available in the circumstances, for example, a suppression order under the Open Courts Act 2013 or a statutory prohibition on publication, the applicant must have tried to avail themselves of that option before applying for a victim privacy order. Public hearing A fundamental characteristic of the principle of open justice is that court proceedings should be held in public and their processes be accessible to the public. A corollary of this principle is that the media is entitled to publish fair and accurate reports on court proceedings. To the extent that there is any limitation on the public hearing aspect of section 24, such limitation is reasonable and justified for the same reasons set out above regarding the policy rationale for the victim privacy order scheme: that is, to protect those close to deceased victims of sexual offences from undue distress arising from the publication of the deceased victim’s identifying details. Further safeguards in the Bill that limit any potential impact upon the right to a public hearing include that: • a victim privacy order must not prevent the publication of details of an alleged offence or identification of an alleged offender provided that publication is not likely to lead to the identification of the deceased victim • disclosure of certain information to a prescribed person or body for a prescribed statutory function is not prevented by a victim privacy order, • a statement of reasons for making the order must, in certain circumstances, be given by the court at the request of any person who, in the opinion of the court, has a sufficient interest in the terms and effect of the order. Right to liberty (Section 21) Section 21 of the Charter provides that every person has the right to liberty, and that a person must not be deprived of his or her liberty arbitrarily and except on grounds, and in accordance with procedures, established by law. The Bill would make it a summary offence for a person to knowingly breach a victim privacy order or an interim victim privacy order. A person, including relevant media organisations, would be taken to be aware that an order is in force if a court has electronically transmitted notice of the order to that person. This offence carries a maximum penalty of four months imprisonment and/or a fine 20 penalty units for an individual (and 50 penalty units for a body corporate), which interferes with a person’s right to liberty. The interference will only arise where the prosecution can prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that a person has committed an offence and the court finds the person guilty and imposes a term of imprisonment. Further, in sentencing, the court will have regard to the governing principles set out in Part 2 of the Sentencing Act 1991 in determining the appropriate sentence. Therefore, interferences with the right to liberty under this Bill are neither arbitrary nor unlawful and are compatible with section 21 of the Charter.

BILLS 2532 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

The right to be presumed innocent (section 25(1)) Section 25(1) of the Charter provides that a person charged with a criminal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law. An aspect of this right is the requirement that the prosecution in a criminal case has the burden of proving every element of an offence beyond reasonable doubt. Courts have recognised that a reverse onus provision (where the legal onus of proof is on an accused to disprove an element of an offence) limits the presumption of innocence in section 25(1), but that no such limitation arises by a provision which places only an evidentiary onus on an accused. The Bill makes it an offence to knowingly contravene a victim privacy order or interim privacy order. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, a person is taken to be aware that a victim privacy order or an interim victim privacy order is in force if a court has electronically transmitted notice of the order to the person. This provision may engage the right to be presumed innocent, but does not limit the right. The provision imposes an evidentiary presumption on a person who has been electronically transmitted notice of an order—to demonstrate that they were not aware of the order. In the absence of other evidence, it is reasonable to assume that a person to whom notice of an order has been sent will be aware of the existence of the order. An accused is only required to point to evidence to the contrary, and if they do so, the onus would then shift to the prosecution to prove that a person had knowledge of the existence of the victim privacy order or the interim victim privacy order. This is not incompatible with section 25(1) of the Charter because it would not alter the presumption of innocence. Rather, the Bill places an evidential burden on the accused. As the Court of Appeal held in R v Da(1), ‘it cannot be said that an evidentiary onus, falling short of imposing any burden of persuasion, limits that right [to be presumed innocent]. In effect, the evidentiary burden requires the accused only to raise a reasonable doubt, upon which the burden falls on the prosecution to remove that doubt.’ Hon. Natalie Hutchins, MP Minister for Crime Prevention Minister for Corrections Minister for Youth Justice Minister for Victim Support (1) (2016) 263 A Crim R 429, [48]. Second reading Ms HUTCHINS (Sydenham—Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice, Minister for Victim Support) (12:16): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time. I ask that my second-reading speech be incorporated into Hansard. Incorporated speech as follows: The Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Bill will make important reforms to ensure that the stories of deceased victim-survivors of sexual offences can be shared with the dignity and respect that they deserve. The Bill will also introduce a new mechanism to protect the privacy of victims of crime in appropriate cases, in recognition of the significant distress and trauma that can result where victims are publicly identified against their wishes. The reforms in this Bill touch on issues that are deeply personal. Every victim’s experience is unique, and their family and personal relationships are varied. In developing these reforms, the Government consulted widely with stakeholders including families of deceased victims, victim-survivors, advocates such as the #LetUsSpeak campaign and media representatives. We have heard strong and compelling arguments for both the protection of a victim’s identity and the free reporting of this information. We have also heard stories about the very real and profound distress that can result from placing undue restrictions on sharing a victim’s story, as well as from the reporting of details of a victim’s experience against their and their family’s wishes. Given these very different and personal perspectives, it is unsurprising that we have heard a range of views on how the law should apply to deceased sexual offence victims—from those who consider that the protection of a victim’s privacy should be absolute and enduring, to others who do not support restrictions on publication under any circumstances, and every perspective in between. Some stakeholders emphasised the importance of being able to speak publicly about the sexual offences committed against their loved ones, especially when they have died. It is very clear that for some families, sharing these stories assists their healing process and their ability to grieve and honour the memory of those who have experienced profound trauma and violence.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2533

For other families, the opposite approach is needed to heal, to grieve and to honour their loved one. They do not wish to publicly discuss the details of the traumatic death of their loved ones for personal, cultural or religious reasons and find it distressing when this occurs against their will. These different views and experiences are deeply felt and equally valid. There is no right or wrong way for victims to experience the impacts of a crime or a correct way for family and friends to grieve for a deceased loved one. I want to take this opportunity to thank all of those who contributed to the development of these reforms and shared their experiences and views with us. I appreciate that many of you will not agree with every aspect of the reforms in this Bill. However, your different perspectives have been invaluable in shaping our response to this complex issue. The Government’s task has been to craft a set of reforms that balance the different views and experiences we have heard. There is no one-size-fits-all approach that addresses the needs of every victim and family. However, I believe the reforms in this Bill strike the right balance and do so in a way that is sensitive and respectful of the many and varied perspectives we have heard from those who have experienced or been touched by crime. The Bill follows on from reforms that came into effect in November 2020, which made it easier for victim- survivors to speak publicly about their experience, and control when and how their stories are published by others. As those reforms were progressed urgently, they included interim measures to create a pathway for a person to seek a court order authorising publication of identifying details about a deceased victim. At the time, the Government was very clear that more substantial reforms could be needed to improve the law relating to deceased victims. This Bill will not change the current prohibition on publishing details that are likely to identify a victim of a sexual offence during their lifetime. This prohibition has been part of Victorian law for many decades and is designed to encourage the reporting to police and prosecution of sexual offences by protecting the privacy of victim-survivors unless a specified defence or exception applies. There is broad support for these provisions to continue. However, the Bill will address the current lack of clarity about deceased victims. The Judicial Proceedings Reports Act 1958 (Act) does not currently specify when the publication prohibition ends, and there are differing views on whether the prohibition applies after a victim’s death. The Bill will end the automatic publication prohibition upon a victim’s death, allowing their identifying details to be published without restriction. This will align the law with strong public sentiment and law reform trends that support open justice, freedom of expression and the need to raise awareness about sexual and gender- based violence. It is also consistent with the rationale behind the 2020 reforms, which made it easier for victims’ stories to be told. However, the Government also recognises that for some victims of sexual offending and their families, ongoing privacy is important, whether for personal, cultural or religious reasons. The proposed new victim privacy order scheme reflects this by allowing family or close friends of a deceased victim of sexual offending to apply for a court order restricting or prohibiting the publication of identifying details of that victim as a victim of sexual offending. Courts will be able to make a victim privacy order in exceptional cases only, where the need for such protection outweighs the public interest in publication. This is a high bar, but an appropriate one, and will ensure that important public interests such as freedom of expression and open justice may only be limited in exceptional and appropriate circumstances. The reforms broadly align with the VLRC’s recommendations about deceased victim-survivors, as they will end the publication prohibition upon death and provide a court application process to protect a victim’s anonymity in limited cases. I will now discuss some key aspects of the new victim privacy order scheme. A ‘person with a sufficient interest’, such as a family member or a close friend of the victim, may apply for a victim privacy order after the victim’s death. Such applications can be made in the Supreme, County or Magistrates’ Courts. To promote victim autonomy as far as possible, the court will be required to consider any known views of the victim expressed during their lifetime. The court will need to be satisfied that a victim privacy order is necessary to restrict or prohibit publication of details likely to identify a person as a victim of sexual offending to avoid undue distress to the ‘person with a sufficient interest’. The court will also need to be satisfied that the particular circumstances of the case make it necessary to displace the relevant public interests—such as open justice, freedom of communication and disclosure of

BILLS 2534 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

information. This is a high threshold to ensure that these important public interests are only displaced in exceptional circumstances. Importantly, the Bill makes clear that the court must not consider the views of the offender or the alleged offender in this process, even if they are a family member or have a sufficient interest otherwise. In urgent situations, a court may make an interim victim privacy order without determining the merits of an application. This may be necessary, for example, where a family wishes to urgently prevent the publication of identifying details following the sudden death of a victim. An important aspect of the 2020 reforms was to give victim-survivors greater control over when and how their stories are told. Consistent with those reforms, the Bill will allow orders to be tailored to the particular circumstances of the case. The court will specify the period of a victim privacy order, which may not exceed five years, but which may be extended if the circumstances warrant. The court will also specify where the order applies, as interstate application may be necessary to achieve the purpose for which the order is made. Finally, in recognition of the distress and trauma that unwanted publication can cause to a victim’s family or friends, it will be a criminal offence for a person to knowingly breach a victim privacy order. Scope of these reforms The government has heard that for some victim-survivors ‘singling out’ of sexual offences for special treatment is troubling. We have also heard about the profound impact that crime can have on all victims and families, not just those who are victims of sexual offending. We want to empower and protect sexual offence victims. These reforms focus on this cohort, in line with the framework of the Act. In no way should this be viewed as an indication that it is shameful to be a victim of sexual offending. It is perpetrators, not victims, who should carry the shame for their crimes and the damage they have inflicted. While victim privacy orders are only available in relation to deceased sexual offence victims, as noted above we heard that some victims experience distress as a result of media reporting on non-sexual offending. The scheme will be reviewed after two years of operation to ensure it is striking the right balance and serving the interests of victims and their families. When the review occurs the government will consult with victims of other offences about whether the scheme is achieving its objectives, and consider whether any changes to it are necessary. The Bill therefore provides scope to expand the victim privacy order scheme to victims of other offences in future, through regulations. Importantly and appropriately, any decision to expand the scheme will not be made lightly, and only in consultation with victims and families touched by crime. Implementation and commencement of the reforms The Bill will commence in stages. The new victim privacy order scheme will commence first, in mid-October 2021. This will allow implementation time for courts and other stakeholders. Commencing this scheme first will also give families or friends of deceased victims the opportunity to apply for a victim privacy order if they wish to, before the publication prohibition relating to deceased victims is lifted in mid-December 2021. Conclusion I commend the Bill to the house. Mr WELLS (Rowville) (12:16): I move:

That the debate be adjourned. Motion agreed to and debate adjourned. Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day.

PETITIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2535

Petitions Following petition presented to house by Clerk: ST ARNAUD AMBULANCE STATION To the Legislative Assembly of Victoria The petition of the residence of St Arnaud, Victoria, 3478 and its surrounds draws to the attention of the House Significant changes set to occur on the 28th of June with staffing of the St Arnaud Ambulance Station, which will reduce the availability of Advanced Life Support (ALS) Paramedic Ambulances to respond to emergencies. The petitioners therefore request that the Legislative Assembly of Victoria We request that there is an immediate review into the appropriateness of these changes as we have grave concerns that death or serious injury may result due to the changes reducing the number of ALS ambulances in town from two to one. We appreciate these changes are designed to enhance the capabilities of Ambulance Victoria’s response. However, we strongly argue that there are unique factors that have not been factored into this plan, which include but are not limited to the geographical location of St Arnaud and the prolonged distance to a Base Hospital. We request that the rollout due to commence on the 28th of June is ceased until consultation with the town of St Arnaud and a representative from State Government occurs, therefore ensuring the mitigation of all risk is considered. By Ms STALEY (Ripon) (361 signatures) Tabled. Ordered that petition be considered next day on motion of Ms STALEY (Ripon). Committees SCRUTINY OF ACTS AND REGULATIONS COMMITTEE Alert Digest No. 9 Ms CONNOLLY (Tarneit) (12:18): I have the honour to present to the house a report from the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, being Alert Digest No. 9 of 2021 on the following bills:

Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 Energy Legislation Amendment (Energy Fairness) Bill 2021 Liquor Control Reform Amendment Bill 2021 Occupational Health and Safety and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 Mutual Recognition (Victoria) Amendment Bill 2021 Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021 Racing Amendment Bill 2021 Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal and Other Acts Amendment (Federal Jurisdiction and Other Matters) Bill 2021 together with appendices. Ordered to be published.

DOCUMENTS 2536 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Documents DOCUMENTS Incorporated list as follows: DOCUMENTS TABLED UNDER ACTS OF PARLIAMENT—The Clerk tabled the following documents under Acts of Parliament: Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978: Orders under s 17B granting licences over: Alexandra Gardens Reserve (two documents) Alexandra Park Reserve Order under s 17D granting a lease over Sandringham Beach Park Reserve Education and Care Services National Law Act 2010—Education and Care Services National Amendment Regulations 2021 under s 303 Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984—Notices under s 32(3)(a)(iii) in relation to: Statutory Rule 47 (Gazette G26, 1 July 2021) Environment Reference Standard (Gazette G26, 1 July 2021) Melbourne Cricket Ground Trust—Report year ended 31 March 2021 National Parks Act 1975—Notice of consent under s 40 to undertake petroleum operations within Port Campbell National Park Ombudsman: Annual Plan 2021–22—Ordered to be published Councils and complaints—A good practice guide 2nd edition—Ordered to be published Investigation into good practice when conducting prison disciplinary hearings—Ordered to be published Parliamentary Committees Act 2003—Government response to the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee’s Report on the Inquiry into the Victorian Government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic Parliamentary Salaries, Allowances and Superannuation Act 1968—Report on distribution from the Assembly Suspension Fines Fund 2020–21 Planning and Environment Act 1987—Notices of approval of amendments to the following Planning Schemes: Alpine—C61, GC161 Ararat—C45, GC161 Bass Coast—C157, C160 Baw Baw—GC161 Benalla—C32, GC161 Boroondara—C356 Brimbank—C211 Buloke—GC161 Cardinia—C272 Casey—C269, C282 Central Goldfields—GC161 Colac Otway—C90, C109, GC161, GC191 Corangamite—GC161 East Gippsland—GC161 Gannawarra—GC161 Glen Eira—C225, C226

DOCUMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2537

Golden Plains—C83, C96, GC161, GC191 Greater Bendigo—C255 Greater Dandenong—C227 Greater Geelong—C363, C409, C423 Greater Shepparton—C218, GC161 Hepburn—GC161 Hindmarsh—C17 Hobsons Bay—C127 Horsham—C80 Kingston—C190 Knox—C190 Latrobe—GC161 Mansfield—C43 Maribyrnong—C167 Maroondah—C145 Melbourne—C412 Melton—C210, C225 Mitchell—C145, C159 Moira—C90, GC161 Monash—C159 Moonee Valley—C202, C205, C221, GC191 Moorabool—C92, GC161 Mornington Peninsula—C237, C255, C279 Mount Alexander—GC161 Murrindindi—GC161 Nillumbik—C135, C136 Northern Grampians—GC161 Port of Melbourne—C3 Port Phillip—C162 Strathbogie—GC161 Swan Hill—GC161 Victoria Planning Provisions—VC203 Wangaratta—C78 Warrnambool—C208 Whitehorse—C235 Wodonga—C133 Wyndham—C259 Yarra—C290, C292 Yarra Ranges—C189 Yarriambiack—GC161 Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008—Report to Parliament on the Extension of the Declaration of the State of Emergency—16th Report Statutory Rules under the following Acts: Agricultural Industry Development Act 1990—SR 57 Building Act 1993—SRs 72, 73

DOCUMENTS 2538 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Child Wellbeing and Safety Act 2005—SR 62 Children, Youth and Families Act 2005—SR 90 Conservation, Forests and Lands Act 1987—SR 91 Corporations (Ancillary Provisions) Act 2001—SR 80 Country Fire Authority Act 1958—SR 86 Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978—SR 64 Domestic Building Contracts Act 1995—SR 63 Environment Protection Act 1970—SR 59 Environment Protection Act 2017—SRs 60, 82, 83, 92 Forests Act 1958—SR 65 Funerals Act 2006—SR 77 Juries Act 2000—SR 81 Land Act 1958—SR 66 Local Government Act 1989—SR 71 Local Government Act 2020—SRs 69, 70 Magistrates’ Court Act 1989—SR 89 Marine Safety Act 2010—SRs 78, 79 National Parks Act 1975—SR 67 Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004—SRs 88, 93 Professional Engineers Registration Act 2019—SR 58 Road Safety Act 1986—SR 75 Service Victoria Act 2018—SR 84 Subordinate Legislation Act 1994—SR 61 Tobacco Act 1987—SR 85 Transfer of Land Act 1958—SR 74 Transport (Compliance and Miscellaneous) Act 1983—SR 87 Wildlife Act 1975—SR 68 Zero and Low Emission Vehicle Distance-based Charge Act 2021—SR 76 Subordinate Legislation Act 1994: Documents under s 15 in relation to Statutory Rules 53, 55, 57, 58, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 78, 79, 81, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93 Documents under s 16B in relation to: Child Wellbeing and Safety Act 2005—Remaking of the Child Safe Standards Environment Protection Act 2017: EPA Designation—classification of agricultural and veterinary chemical waste for the purposes of the ChemClear program EPA Designation—classification of architectural and decorative waste paint for the purposes of the Paintback stewardship scheme EPA Designation—classification of arsenic-contaminated waste from the City of Greater Bendigo EPA Designation—classification of pharmaceutical waste for the purposes of the return unwanted medicines (RUM) project EPA Determination—discharges or emissions to the atmosphere from prescribed activities EPA Determination—discharges to land or surface water from prescribed activities EPA Determination—permission exemption for modifications to a sewage treatment plant

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2539

EPA Determination—exemption from requirement to hold permission—temporary storage and containment of waste oils, paints and chemicals generated at another site at a council transfer station EPA Determination—specifications acceptable to the Authority for receiving fill material EPA Determination—specifications acceptable to the Authority for receiving livestock manure and effluent EPA Determination—Specifications acceptable to the Authority for receiving processed organics EPA Determination—Specifications acceptable to the Authority for receiving recycled aggregates National Electricity (Victoria) Act 2005—2021 Ministerial Order under s 16BA Water Act 1989—Interim Order for Amendment of the Trading Rules for Declared Water Systems (Revised Goulburn to Murray Trade Rule) Victorian Independent Remuneration Tribunal—Members of Parliament (Victoria) Annual Adjustment Determination 2021 Wrongs Act 1958—Notice of scale of fees and costs for referrals of medical questions to medical panels under Part VBA (Gazette S339, 28 June 2021). PROCLAMATIONS—Under Standing Order 177A, the Clerk tabled the following proclamations fixing operative dates: Marine Safety Amendment (Better Boating Fund) Act 2020—Whole Act—1 July 2021 (Gazette S347, 29 June 2021) Mutual Recognition (Victoria) Amendment Act 2021—Whole Act—1 July 2021 (Gazette S346, 29 June 2021) Planning and Environment Amendment Act 2021—Remaining provisions—7 July 2021 (Gazette S372, 6 July 2021). Bills CHILD WELLBEING AND SAFETY (CHILD SAFE STANDARDS COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT) AMENDMENT BILL 2021 MUTUAL RECOGNITION (VICTORIA) AMENDMENT BILL 2021 Council’s agreement The SPEAKER (12:20): I have received messages from the Legislative Council agreeing to the following bills without amendment: the Child Wellbeing and Safety (Child Safe Standards Compliance and Enforcement) Amendment Bill 2021 and the Mutual Recognition (Victoria) Amendment Bill 2021. TRANSPORT LEGISLATION MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS BILL 2021 Council’s amendments The SPEAKER (12:21): I have received a message from the Legislative Council agreeing to the Transport Legislation Miscellaneous Amendments Bill 2021 with amendments. Ordered that amendments be taken into consideration later this day.

MOTIONS 2540 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

CHILD WELLBEING AND SAFETY (CHILD SAFE STANDARDS COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT) AMENDMENT BILL 2021 EDUCATION AND TRAINING REFORM AMENDMENT (PROTECTION OF SCHOOL COMMUNITIES) BILL 2021 MUTUAL RECOGNITION (VICTORIA) AMENDMENT BILL 2021 OFFSHORE PETROLEUM AND GREENHOUSE GAS STORAGE (CROSS-BOUNDARY GREENHOUSE GAS TITLES AND OTHER MATTERS) AMENDMENT BILL 2021 Royal assent The SPEAKER (12:21): I inform the house that the Governor has given royal assent to the Child Wellbeing and Safety (Child Safe Standards Compliance and Enforcement) Amendment Bill 2021, the Education and Training Reform Amendment (Protection of School Communities) Bill 2021, the Mutual Recognition (Victoria) Amendment Bill 2021 and the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Cross-boundary Greenhouse Gas Titles and Other Matters) Amendment Bill 2021. LIQUOR CONTROL REFORM AMENDMENT BILL 2021 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2021 POLICE INFORMANTS ROYAL COMMISSION IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR BILL 2021 RACING AMENDMENT BILL 2021 Appropriation The SPEAKER (12:21): I have received messages from the Governor recommending appropriations for the purposes of the Liquor Control Reform Amendment Bill 2021, the Occupational Health and Safety and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021, the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021 and the Racing Amendment Bill 2021. Motions GENERAL BUSINESS Ms SHEED (Shepparton) (12:22): I desire to move, by leave:

That this house: (1) notes that non-government business is an essential part of ensuring a responsible and representative Parliament in any Westminster system, and currently Victoria’s Legislative Assembly is the only lower house in Australia that does not provide meaningful opportunities for non-government members to move motions or progress bills; (2) resolves to replace matters of public importance and the grievance debate with 2 hours of non- government business every sitting Wednesday; (3) refers the required amendments to standing orders to the Standing Orders Committee to report to the house by 14 October 2021; and (4) adopts required changes to the standing orders by 28 October 2021. Leave refused.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2541

Business of the house PROGRAM Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop) (12:23): I move:

That, under standing order 94(2): (1) the order of the day, government business, relating to the Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021 be considered and completed by 7.00 pm on Wednesday, 4 August 2021; and (2) the orders of the day, government business, relating to the following bills be considered and completed by 5.00 pm on Thursday, 5 August 2021: Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021 Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Bill 2021. In making a few comments on the government business program, I welcome everyone back for the spring session of the 2021 parliamentary year. We are back in fine form, obviously in reduced numbers in this place but not with reduced vigour on the government side to continue to progress a strong legislative agenda through this Parliament for the remainder of this year, next year and who knows how much longer, but our focus is on this week, and this week, notwithstanding some changes, we have a very big and important agenda to progress. Just before I talk about the agenda for this week I do want to refer colleagues to the changed sitting arrangements for the house. Again, I thank for their cooperation all members of the house, with the assistance of our clerks, to get us to this point—to continue to operate Parliament in a COVID-safe way. Obviously it is a little challenging and a little frustrating that we continue to become very familiar with these changed arrangements, but I think now, a year and a half into the pandemic, we have become reasonably well practised at it, and particularly the ability for members to participate remotely is one that appears to be working smoothly. It means that people can look after their health, look after their wellbeing or that of their family and still undertake their parliamentary duties. And obviously, too, I note that there are reduced numbers in the house for this week and the ongoing requirement to wear masks at all times other than when we are on our feet. And again, I thank the Parliament and the parliamentary staff for assisting us to operate in a COVID-safe way. On the arrangements for this week, it will not have escaped colleagues’ notice that the government business program is a little irregular this week, in that we will be splitting the government business program and putting to the vote the bill that has just been first and second read into the Parliament, which is the Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021. And again with that bill and also the Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Bill 2021, I appreciate the assistance of the opposition and the crossbenchers for facilitating the required briefings to enable those bills to be first and second read immediately and then to be considered and debated over the course of this week. Clearly as a consequence of the pandemic and the ongoing impact of the pandemic and—as the minister as he was introducing the bill reported—in the absence of JobKeeper, we have been required to, if you like, reintroduce some of those provisions around providing support for tenants of commercial properties. So we hope that the Parliament will support the passage of this bill both in this place and in the upper house over the course of this week. As I said, there are two other bills that will go to the government business program vote at 5 o’clock on Thursday, and I do note the request from the opposition for the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021 to be taken to consideration in detail. I would like to note that, time permitting, we would also like to do some of the take-note motions on the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System report and, if time is available, on the budget as well. They continue to be important items of debate that colleagues wish to make their contributions on, and I know there are still many members who are particularly keen to make their comments and put on the record their support for the mental health royal commission recommendations.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 2542 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

The final point I wanted to make, as I am sure it was greeted with great joy all round, is that we have added a sitting week to the parliamentary schedule for this year. That sitting week will be 30 November and 1 and 2 December, and it has required a change to the sitting week in November. That is just further evidence of the strong, progressive legislative agenda— Mr Wells interjected. Ms ALLAN: We will see how they are holding up at the end of this session when they are fatigued by the huge amount of debate they have had to partake in on our legislative agenda, because we do have a big and busy agenda to progress during the remainder of this year. There is no doubt that the pandemic of 2020 required quite significant change to the legislative program. It required changes to the sitting weeks, it required changes to the ways we did our business in this house and it required changes to the legislative program. But not only have we caught up with some of the work we needed to do from last year, we are pushing ahead with a really big program for the remainder of this year, and I look forward to seeing how those opposite are holding up at 5.00 pm on Thursday, 2 December—no doubt they will be keen to get home and start getting their Christmas lunch ready— because we are determined to continue every single minute of every single day in this place to progress an Andrews Labor government agenda for all Victorians. Mr WELLS (Rowville) (12:29): I will have to start off by saying that the opposition will be opposing the government business program, and there are a number of reasons why we are going to be opposing it. The first point is I take exception to what the manager of government business was saying—that it is all about the opposition being here in November-December. What it is about is actually lazy ministers not doing their job and having the legislation and the consultation in place, ready to go into this chamber. Now, obviously cabinet has given them a bit of a rustle up to make sure that they get the work done. That is why all of a sudden you are going to have this massive big backlog coming through in October-November this year. I will remind all members of the house that this government business program started off with the Occupational Health and Safety and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 and the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021. So the member for Kew is all of a sudden ready to have his briefing, and they call and pull the briefing at the last moment because they could not decide among the government on what they should and should not put into the bill. So that was the first issue, so that allowed us just one bill—the police informants royal commission bill. And then I got a phone call yesterday from the government saying, ‘Oh, well, we’ve got the police informants bill, but we’re going to rush in another two bills—firstly the commercial rent relief’. So the government had six weeks to get this right—six weeks—and all of a sudden cabinet meets on Monday and they have to rush this in. It is going to be first and second read today and debated tomorrow by agreement. For that point I do thank the government, that we are able to debate that tomorrow, because when you look at it, the briefing on this was at 11.30 today— Ms Allan: That was the time you wanted. You asked for that time. Mr WELLS: That was the first available time. Members interjecting. Mr WELLS: Oh, here we go—so it is our fault. The government told us yesterday afternoon. You know, there are certain processes that we go through on a Tuesday morning before Parliament. The first available opportunity was 11.30 today. They had six weeks to get this organised, but no, today we get the briefing. And isn’t it interesting—on the Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Bill 2021, which is the other bill that is being rushed through, I rang our Shadow Attorney-General, Ed O’Donohue, and said to him, ‘Ed, we’ve just been ambushed with this bill. Do you know anything about it?’. He said, ‘No, I don’t know anything about the bill’—except half a dozen journos have contacted him telling him that the bill will be debated this week. The journos rang. So what happened was the government went

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2543 out and briefed all the journos, and then cabinet met and then the government thought, ‘Oh, jeez, we’d better let the opposition know’. I mean, what poor form is that. That is really poor form that you go and tell all the journos about what you are going to do, and they ring the Shadow Attorney-General, Ed O’Donohue, and Ed goes, ‘Well, I’m not actually sure that the bill is going to be debated, because we would have been contacted by the government and we haven’t been’. We had not been. There are two reasons why we are opposing this government business program. With the police informants bill we want to go into the consideration-in-detail stage because we want to move an amendment—so that is the first point. Now, in the history of this term of government, for every request that we have had to go into committee stage not once have we been offered that opportunity to go into the consideration-in-detail stage. So that is the first reason. And the second reason, of course, is the way the government has handled the judicial review bill—the Shadow Attorney-General got ambushed by all these journos wanting to know his comments about it being debated this week, and we were not informed. So there are two clear reasons why we are going to oppose this government business program. We understand under the conditions that we have with the COVID rules the reduced numbers, and we have accepted that question time will be at 2 o’clock. We accept that. There has been a certain amount of good nature, but we will be opposing the government business program for the two reasons I have outlined. Mr EDBROOKE (Frankston) (12:33): I rise in support of the government business program today. First, though, I would like to thank the clerks and the parliamentary staff for doing all the extra hard work to make sure we are working in a COVID-safe environment and can actually come forward for the sitting in Spring Street to represent our electorates as well. It is sad to hear the opposition will be opposing the government business program, because it is a good government business program. It involves debates on the Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Bill 2021, which is a very important piece of legislation, and the Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021, which anyone in a reasonable frame of mind, I think, who is here for their community would be supporting. It is a scheme that allows businesses with a turnover of less than $50 million, which have suffered a decline of course during this COVID crisis, to be able to be supported by the government in light of the fact that the federal government is no longer supporting them with JobKeeper as well. The scheme will protect so many small businesses that we know have been struggling as well. Ms Staley: On a point of order, Speaker, you have previously ruled many times that this debate is a narrow debate. It is not an opportunity to debate the bill. The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Frankston is commenting on the bills. I just ask him to keep those comments on the particular bills brief and relate them to the reasons for or against the government business program. Mr EDBROOKE: Understood, Speaker, and thank you for that. Also, budget reply is a great opportunity for people to speak about all the opportunities provided to their electorates with the previous budget, and there will be an opportunity later on in the week to take note of the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System and the report and recommendations with that as well. We do feel, I guess, in this house today that the opposition are a little bit touchy. We heard a little bit about being ambushed with meetings and whatnot. I think there is probably only one person who is feeling like he might be ambushed at the moment. There is probably only one person that feels like they do not want an extra week to be able to work. For sure I and everyone on this side of the house welcome an extra week to be able to work hard for our communities and to be able to work hard for Victoria and work hard for our wonderful democracy. But I think the only person that probably does not want an extra week, which would provide an extra sitting week, an extra parliamentary party meeting, would be the Leader of the Opposition. It is an extra opportunity for his numbers to be overwhelmed and be ambushed in the party room. We know who our leader is, we know— Mr Wells: On a point of order, Speaker, we have actually given him a bit of leeway to be able to get back to it—

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 2544 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

The SPEAKER: The point of order is? Mr Wells: That, as you said, the motion before the house is a very tightly worded one, and I would ask you to bring the member for Frankston back. The SPEAKER: The member for Frankston did stray off the topic. Mr EDBROOKE: Thank you, Speaker. I do note and I did note that they are a bit touchy today, and there are many reasons for that, but the main one I think we have touched on already. Mr Wells: On a point of order, Speaker, I would ask you to sit the member for Frankston down. You have already warned him once, and this would be a second warning, so I would ask you to sit him down. The SPEAKER: Order! I do not uphold the point of order, but I do ask the member for Frankston to come back to the business program debate. Mr EDBROOKE: I certainly look forward to being able to debate these three pieces of very, very important legislation. As I have said, it is disappointing that an opposition would not be supporting a government business program that seeks to improve so much legislation for Victoria and indeed assists small businesses. We have all had small businesses—all over Victoria now—in our electorates approaching us needing help, needing assistance so they do not fall through the cracks and so they can actually come back from what is this international pandemic. This government is putting forward legislation today that will actually assist those businesses, and if the opposition do not support that, they have to be out in their communities and they have to be actually answering why they do not support that. This will save businesses, and the people on this side of the house, the members on this side of the house, are supporting small businesses by supporting this legislation and this government business program. With that I would just like to again extend my thankyou to our parliamentary staff, who do such a good job serving not just the lower house but the upper house as well. I am in full support of this government business program and cannot wait to debate it. Mr D O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (12:38): I will just say a few words on the big and ambitious agenda that the Leader of the House talked about. I pick up the member for Frankston’s comment about how much the government supports small business—so much so that they did not actually have this legislation ready to go, this commercial tenancy rent relief, the bill that we will be debating today. It had to be brought on quickly because the government suddenly realised it should have done something to support small business. Apparently that is not something that might have come to their mind in the last 12 or 18 months; it is something that they have just thought of in the last couple of days—‘Perhaps we need to add something in’. That big and ambitious agenda that the Leader of the House talked about may well or well not be true, but it is also a shambles the way that that agenda is put together constantly in this place. We see it this week, as the member for Rowville said. On Thursday and Friday we get the government business program. Occupational health and safety, police informants—no problem, we will tell our colleagues to get prepared for these bills. Then on Monday afternoon, ‘Oh, throw all that out, we’ve got a completely different idea. We’ve suddenly discovered we need to support small business, member for Frankston, and we’re actually going to bring in a commercial rent relief situation’. Likewise, the Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Bill 2021, which is on the agenda this week. Where is the rush with this? Where has this been for 12 months? We told the government this 12 months ago. A member in the other place, Ed O’Donohue, the shadow minister, has been campaigning on this, as have numerous media outlets, as have victims of crime and their families. This was abundantly obvious to everyone, yet suddenly at the last minute we are going to have to rush a piece of legislation in with no opportunity for the opposition to talk in detail to the community and to

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2545 all those people—this just gets rushed in. That is one of the reasons that we are certainly going to be opposing the shambles this week. The other is the consideration in detail. The member for Rowville is very comprehensive in his contributions, but he did miss one thing this week. Normally when we ask to go into— A member interjected. Mr D O’BRIEN: Absolutely you should throw the pen. You should be a little bit embarrassed about this. Normally when we ask to go into consideration in detail on a bit of legislation we get the usual response, which is what? It is— A member: We’ll see if there’s enough time. Mr D O’BRIEN: ‘We’ll see if there’s enough time’, ‘If you’re well behaved’, ‘We’ll consider it when your dad gets home’—all those sorts of excuses we get. But today we did not even get that. Today we just got ‘It’s noted that the opposition has requested time for consideration in detail’. We have gone backwards. We are not even getting the ‘Maybe later’. We are not even getting the ‘We’ll see’. We are just getting a straight-out ‘It’s been noted’. It is pretty clear what the answer is to that in that the government does not want us to go into consideration in detail on the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021. That is another reason why we are certainly opposing the government business program this week—the government business program that we are being presented with today, I should add, just in case it does happen to change again, because who knows with a government that tells the media first before it tells the Parliament, let alone the shadow minister for a particular portfolio. That is the approach that we have got, and who knows what might change? I might add that the member for Rowville mentioned how journalists were first to know about the introduction of the judicial review bill. It does remind me a little bit of the COVID updates, where it is journalists that seem to know what is happening with COVID each day, or with restrictions. I am not sure why the government does not just cut out the middleman and get Rich Willingham and Raf Epstein to do their press conferences on COVID. It would save us all a lot of time. They are the ones who always find out about anything first. When it comes to the government business program the government is somewhat of a shambles as well. It is not telling the Parliament. It is not giving the Parliament the courtesy of acknowledging what is actually happening this week, and with legislation like the judicial review bill I think it is pretty poor form that the shadow minister finds out from the media that there is some legislation coming in when we have already been told what the government’s intentions are this week. That is why we will be opposing this business program. I for one cannot wait to have that extra week of sitting, because there are so many issues for us to raise from our communities, so much angst out there, so many more questions to put to the Premier, to the ministers, to the Treasurer, to the Leader of the House. I look forward to coming back, and I will be very happy to be here in December for those sittings. Mr FOWLES (Burwood) (12:43): It is my pleasure to make a contribution on this terrific government business program. I do want to pick up a few of the matters that were raised before I got onto my feet, not least this suggestion that somehow the Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021 ought to have been ready to go or to have been all packaged up and on the shelf just ready to be inserted into the Parliament. There is a bit of a cognitive dissonance here because the federal government has been dragging its heels on all matters relating to support of people in this state, support of businesses in this state. They have been dragging their heels. They have had the acid put to them on a whole range of matters, not least of which is JobKeeper, and we have now got the sort of JobKeeper equivalent finally being rolled out, but only after pressure was brought to bear on the government by ministers in this place. I find it extraordinary that the opposition could seek to parlay blame for this bill not being ready.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 2546 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Ms Staley: On a point of order, Speaker, the member for Burwood has had a minute on this, and so far he has just talked about the federal government. That is not the government business program. The SPEAKER: The member for Burwood is responding to issues raised earlier in debate, but I ask him to stay on the government business program as he does that. Mr FOWLES: Delighted to, Speaker, thank you. The commercial tenancies relief scheme is a very, very important matter, and it is a matter that has been finalised in the context of what has been happening with the federal government. That is the reality. The government business program before this chamber reflects what the federal government has and has not done—and the emphasis perhaps will be on the latter part of that sentence, because the federal government has been pretty good at not doing very much for the great state of Victoria in recent times. We have seen them shamed into providing some action. We have seen them shamed into providing— Mr Wells: On a point of order, Speaker, as we said earlier, it is a very narrow debate, and I would ask you to bring the member for Burwood back to the topic of the government business program. The SPEAKER: I uphold the point of order. The member for Burwood has strayed. The member for Burwood to come back to the government business program. Mr FOWLES: I will endeavour to unstray, Speaker, thank you. It is terrific that we have got such a strong legislative agenda. It is terrific that we are having an extra sitting week this year. It is terrific that we are not wasting a day in government. We are not wasting a day because we understand the importance of the opportunity and we understand the importance of delivering for Victorians each and every day we have the great honour of serving in this place. I find it extraordinary that we are being accused of laziness by those opposite. It is an extraordinary accusation to level in circumstances where this full and busy legislative program is being brought through this house. There is a ton of legislation coming. We have dealt with a ton of legislation over the course of the 59th Parliament, and long may it continue. We will be dealing with plenty right up until the writs are issued in November next year. We have got the full book this year, the extra week this year, the full book right into next year’s election. There are many things this government can be accused of being—you know, diligent, hardworking, all those things—but lazy is not one of them, and it is specious at best I think to accept that argument from those opposite. There has been some criticism made of the timing of some of these changes. There is, perhaps as the former Prime Minister might have said, a lack of agility from those opposite, a lack of ability to roll with the punches a bit and understand that things move quickly in this global pandemic. And as much as those opposite used almost the totality of the most recent sitting week to lambast this government for its handling of the pandemic and spent no end of time referencing the efforts of other jurisdictions in the nation, I think we are expecting as part of this government business program perhaps a bit less commentary in relation to those issues, a bit less of the ‘Well, you lot should just do exactly what New South Wales does’, because what we have seen of course is that there are differences in approach. There are differences in approach, there is no doubt about that, and we send the New South Wales government every best wish in getting on top of their current outbreak and hopefully running this delta outbreak to ground. That will give all of us the ability to focus not just on bills being brought through urgently, as in this government business program, but on the rest of the very important matters affecting the great state of Victoria. Ms STALEY (Ripon) (12:48): I rise to speak on the government business program, which, as the Manager of Opposition Business has said, the coalition will be opposing. I begin with the profound lack of respect this government has shown and continues to show towards victims of sexual assault. We have got a bill that has now been brought in and put on the government business program, the Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Bill 2021, which had a bill briefing yesterday. The opposition first saw the bill yesterday. Most victim support groups have not seen the bill until today. There has not been an opportunity for this bill to have its proper two weeks lying on the table for

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2547 consultation, and perhaps we could consider that that would be fair enough in the circumstances except that this government has such form on this very, very specific issue. The government originally brought in legislation to amend the Judicial Proceedings Reports Amendment Act 1958 back in February 2020, and they got that wrong. Then they came back in October 2020, twice, and amended it again. They had a sunset clause of September 2021 for those amendments. So they have known since October 2020 that this bill—which we had brought to us one day ago, which victims of crime have not seen—had to be brought into the Parliament this week, and that is disgraceful. They were disgraceful last time when they would not listen to victims of crime, when they got it wrong last time, and they have now completely backflipped. This bill ahead of us now allows for the publication of people’s names once they have died if they are victims of sexual assault, and they are only bringing this here because they got it so comprehensively wrong before. And when they do bring it in here, they do not give those victims of crime the respect they deserve by having a proper consultation process. This is a disgrace. This is an absolutely disgraceful government doing a disgraceful thing. A member: Shame. Ms STALEY: Shame. Then we come to the Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021. Again this is a bill for which the government has had months and months and months to come up with a solution to the problem of small business tenancies. COVID, I think, is now over a year old. Mr D O’Brien: A bit longer, yes. Ms STALEY: A bit longer? Mr D O’Brien: Yes. Ms STALEY: And we have known that small business would be incredibly hurt by shutdowns, particularly the long shutdowns when the government could not get on top of its hotel quarantine. They have known that was coming. So for them to suggest in any way that they have seen the light and are now supporting small business—this is a government that do not understand small business, do not understand the relationships between landlords and tenants, and again have brought forward a bill that they are allowing no consultation and no debate on out in the community. And they think that is a reasonable thing. Somehow this government manage to marry ineptitude with authoritarianism, because they do not actually care about democracy when it comes to having the people of Victoria have a say on the legislation that is brought before them. No, they rush through a government business program on which two of the bills have never been seen before this week, and they think that that is reasonable; they think that that is an okay thing. The Leader of the House described it as ‘a little irregular’. A little irregular? No, Leader of the House, this is completely out of line. Once again we have a situation where this government’s complete ineptitude in getting their legislative agenda in order means that we come here today with new rules brought in this week and new bills that go to very serious issues— serious issues that should be allowed to be debated in the community. It should be allowed for people to have their say out in the community, but again this government just shut it down. This government absolutely does not want anybody to have any consultation out in the community. Ms Allan interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the House! Ms STALEY: And I note that the Leader of the House has now got an ongoing bore at me. She is just boring them out, shutting me down again. Ms SHEED (Shepparton) (12:53):(By leave) I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on this government business program. While I will be supporting the government business program, because

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 2548 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 these two pieces of legislation are incredibly important, I am very unhappy with the way that these bills have been presented to the house at such short notice. I believe that receiving copies of the bill effectively when they are circulated in the house, having got notice of them just yesterday, is not the way that the business of this house should be done. The Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021 is obviously an incredibly important one, and that is across the whole of Victoria and probably across most of Australia now. It is with great sorrow that I have to talk about some of the businesses in my electorate that have really been doing it very hard, and I recall in the last week speaking with two in the hospitality industry. They are some of our outstanding operators, and they are being faced with situations that they never thought they would face because of their success prior to COVID. They have been hit so hard with the shutdowns. Just the tendency for people to be staying at home so much more is really having an impact. So this sort of relief—and we saw it throughout most of last year and indeed up until March this year—is welcome and will at least provide something. But it is a situation where a lot needs to be done quickly and not have delays in payments coming to people, because the level of desperation out in our communities is really great. I think in a situation where bills are presented to the house in this way not to have consideration in detail of those bills is outrageous. It is not good enough to just pass that off. In fact it is the only opportunity in this Legislative Assembly—which is the house of government, in case we have forgotten that—that we get to question ministers, to hold ministers accountable in some way, to let them stand up and defend their bills and show a bit of passion for the bills that they are putting before the house. We get no opportunity to scrutinise bills in this way. There has been a long-term periodic pattern of reduction in consideration in detail. I could refer to the paper that Ray Purdey, a former Clerk of this Parliament, did some years ago where he did a complete history of the introduction of government business and the disposal of non-government business in this house. Gradually over the years there has been an almost complete wipe-out of consideration in detail in this house. We see consideration in detail in the upper house taking place, but most of the ministers are not there. That is not holding government to account. That is not holding ministers to account. That is not giving us the opportunity to question. This Commercial Tenancy Relief Scheme Bill 2021 is largely going to be detailed in regulation. You know, maybe this was a good opportunity to go into consideration in detail, because we have not seen the regulations; the regulations probably have not been done. I would certainly give the government the benefit of the doubt in that surely they would know what is going to go in the regulations and a minister could get up and explain what the bill is, what the regulations will be and how this will work so that by the end of Parliament on Thursday people in my community would have some idea of what to expect in some detail. But no, we do not have that, and it is an entirely unsatisfactory circumstance. It makes a joke of the lower house of this Parliament—we who are the seat of government. We are elected to pass legislation finally and the upper house is a house of review. I mean, really, why are we handballing all the work that is meant to be done in this house to the upper house? It is an entirely disgraceful situation. It is time that the government addressed it. We need a non-government business program. We need to be able to do disallowance motions. We need to be able on this side to consider introducing legislation that affects our communities. We need to restore some level of democracy to this house of this Parliament which has gradually and progressively disappeared. It is not good enough to come in here with bills at the last minute and then shut us down on them. We should be allowed to question ministers on these bills. House divided on motion:

Ayes, 17 Blandthorn, Ms Fregon, Mr Sheed, Ms Carbines, Mr Halse, Mr Spence, Ms

MEMBERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2549

Cheeseman, Mr Kennedy, Mr Tak, Mr Connolly, Ms Pakula, Mr Theophanous, Ms Edbrooke, Mr Richards, Ms Ward, Ms Fowles, Mr Scott, Mr Noes, 10 Angus, Mr O’Brien, Mr D Vallence, Ms Britnell, Ms Ryan, Ms Walsh, Mr Bull, Mr T Staley, Ms Wells, Mr McLeish, Ms

Motion agreed to. Register of opinion on motion Ayes Ms Addison, Mr Andrews, Mr Brayne, Mr Bull, Mr Carroll, Ms Couzens, Ms Crugnale, Ms D’Ambrosio, Mr Dimopoulos, Mr Donnellan, Ms Edwards, Mr Eren, Mr Foley, Ms Green, Ms Halfpenny, Ms Hall, Mr Hamer, Ms Hennessy, Ms Horne, Ms Hutchins, Ms Kilkenny, Mr Maas, Mr McGhie, Mr McGuire, Mr Merlino, Mr Pallas, Mr Pearson, Ms Settle, Mr Staikos, Ms Suleyman, Mr Taylor, Ms Thomas, Ms Williams Noes Mr Newbury, Mr Northe, Mr O’Brien Members statements SENIOR SERGEANT IAN JONES Mr PEARSON (Essendon—Assistant Treasurer, Minister for Regulatory Reform, Minister for Government Services, Minister for Creative Industries) (13:04): I rise to honour the service of Senior Sergeant Ian Jones to my Essendon electorate and the wider community. Senior Sergeant Jones will retire from Victoria Police tomorrow after almost 44 years protecting and serving the Victorian community. The mission of Victoria Police is to provide a safe, secure and orderly society by serving the community and the law. Victoria Police members preserve the peace, protect life and property, prevent offences, detect and apprehend offenders and help those in need of assistance, and Ian Jones has spent decades of his life doing just those things. Ian joined Victoria Police in October 1977 and graduated in March of 1978. His initial deployment saw him work as a constable in Broadmeadows, Flemington and city traffic. Throughout his career Ian served in many roles, locations and progressively senior ranks, including the fraud squad, the Essendon crime investigation unit, Werribee police station intelligence and covert support, the professional standards committee, the crime command themes desk, crime command tasking and coordination. In February 2008 Ian arrived at Moonee Ponds, where he remained, serving the Essendon district until this day—and he has served the community with distinction. Always a straight talker, Ian has been active and engaged right across the community. He has always been up for a chat about how to make the community stronger and safer, and I want to express my deep gratitude to him for working with me in that way. Ian, I wish you well for the well-earned retirement years, and I thank you so very much for your service. COVID-19 Mr WELLS (Rowville) (13:06): This members statement condemns the Andrews Labor government for their unclear and illogical lockdown restrictions. My office has been inundated with calls and emails from frustrated constituents who do not understand why they can go to a restaurant with 100 people in one area yet not visit their loved ones in the safety of their own homes. Has this government even considered that elderly people may not feel comfortable or safe going to a restaurant when they are unaware of who has been there? When you have a loved one over at home, you are in

MEMBERS STATEMENTS 2550 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 most cases aware of their vaccination status and where they have been. How is it less safe than being surrounded by strangers? Families have been kept apart now for far too long. It is so important for people’s mental health that they can see their loved ones. This government need to be consistent with their restrictions and listen to the feedback from Victorians who want to be able to visit family members and loved ones in their own homes. The ridiculous amount of control this government is trying to have over individuals has gone too far. They cannot keep pushing the blame back onto public health advice when they then decide to keep that advice secret. I ask that this incompetent government release the health advice that states home visits with loved ones are of great concern. COBURG RSL Ms BLANDTHORN (Pascoe Vale) (13:07): I was pleased that the Minister for Veterans in the other place recently joined with me in a visit to the Coburg RSL. This is the oldest operating RSL in metropolitan Melbourne and is now situated in the heart of Sydney Road in Coburg. Its membership is diverse, supporting veterans and their families from a range of ages, genders and cultural backgrounds with programs in wellbeing, care, compensation and commemoration of serving and ex- service ADF members and their dependents. This RSL has also, as many have, endured and risen to the challenge of supporting its community through the COVID-19 pandemic. Like many other organisations they have had to adapt to continue their services and keep our community not only safe but mentally and physically nourished, and indeed they rose to the challenge as they always do. The minister and I were also extremely pleased to announce that Coburg RSL’s application to the Andrews Labor government veterans capital works grant program was successful, and they will receive almost $50 000 in funding from this program towards removing and replacing their entry ramp and building an outdoor deck and canopy. This will enhance accessibility for our community and improve the outdoor space, one of the few grassy lawns in Sydney Road, and we all know how important the outdoor spaces around us have become during the pandemic. It was so fantastic to join with the minister in celebrating this great news with hardworking president Michael Pianta, past presidents Dave Thompson and Desmond ‘Desi’ Bourke and so many committee members and community members. Congratulations to Coburg RSL. NATIMUK LAKE WEIR Ms KEALY (Lowan) (13:09): In June last year I wrote to the Premier regarding concerns raised by the Natimuk Lake committee in relation to the long-awaited Natimuk Lake weir. Work on this project started back in 2016 but was quickly shut down by Parks Victoria, citing lack of permits. In 2019 Parks resolved to go ahead with the construction of the weir but refused to provide any funding, instead proposing it dip its hand into the Otto Spehr Trust generously bequeathed to the Natimuk community, a step that would vary the trust provisions and incur significant and unnecessary legal cost for the community. A year on the Premier has refused to respond to the Natimuk community. On behalf of this hardworking committee of volunteers I ask the Premier to urgently intervene to assist the relevant government departments to finally finish this important project for the Natimuk community and to allocate government funding to see this project through to its completion as soon as possible. VICROADS LICENCE TESTING Ms KEALY: I was recently contacted by a constituent regarding the outrageous licence fees charged by VicRoads for testing that was unable to be delivered through no fault of my constituent. My constituent’s son has been trying to access a probationary test for his motorcycle licence, but Labor’s lockdowns and restrictions have prevented bookings and the number of testing opportunities has been extremely limited. When he finally was able to book a test prior to the last lockdown, the instructor called in sick. Despite the extenuating circumstances of testing accessibility, VicRoads have refused to extend my constituent’s learners permit, providing only one option: pay another two grand to restart the probationary testing process. This is completely unacceptable for a government department. (Time expired)

MEMBERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2551

COVID-19 Mr McGHIE (Melton) (13:10): I rise today to speak, as have many before me, about COVID-19 and how this one virus has impacted so many people in so many different ways. Thank you to all Victorians for their massive efforts to keep each other safe. We should be proud of the way our communities are caring for each other. A big shout-out goes to every single person working at my local testing sites at Melton and Bacchus Marsh and to the grammar school community as a whole for staying home and keeping us all safe. I know these times are very difficult for so many and for so many reasons, none more so than those who have suffered or continue to suffer from COVID. I relay the recollection of someone I know well who contracted COVID-19, now fortunately recovering. His recollection spans about 20 days. His symptoms started with a benign headache and just a general feeling of being unwell. A test was undertaken three days later when these symptoms did not subside. Over days four to eight he had chills and fever. He lost his sense of smell and taste and spent these days in bed. Day eight saw an escalation to chronic vomiting over 48 hours and stabbing pains throughout his body, along with feverish episodes, making it impossible to sleep or rest. Days nine to 16 were the days his breathing became laboured and the stabbing pain in his body began to ease somewhat. All this time he was in and out of hospital. He described this time as by far the worst health related experience of his young life. He is in his 30s and would not want anyone to suffer unnecessarily. I do not share this to scare. I do, however, use this as a reminder of how important vaccination and testing are. Please do not wait; please do not hesitate. Let us drive this virus to the ground. LODDON CHILDCARE SERVICES Ms STALEY (Ripon) (13:12): Under standing order 49 I present a petition to the Legislative Assembly bearing 58 signatures in the following terms:

The petition of residents in Victoria draws to the attention of the house that there is a lack of appropriate child care for children across Loddon shire. Parents and carers need access to child care to engage in work or study. The petitioners request that the government provide better access to childcare services for the various Loddon shire communities. This is the first of many more lodgements of petition signatures I have on this topic. The issue of the lack of child care, both for small children and for before- and after-school care, is endemic and at crisis levels across the Loddon shire. We have many, many examples. For example, there are two teachers at Wedderburn secondary college who cannot teach at the moment because they cannot get child care for their children. This is an issue of access. It is not an issue of the subsidies that the federal government provides; this is about facilities and access. It is absolutely a state government responsibility. As we have seen in other parts of my electorate where we have had some success, rural communities have changed, and they need child care and they need childminding services. As a result, we are going to have a lot more of these petitioners coming to the government and demanding action so they have equitable access. TWEDDLE CHILD AND FAMILY HEALTH SERVICE Ms THEOPHANOUS (Northcote) (13:13): Last month I joined my friend and colleague the member for Footscray to visit Tweddle, an early parenting centre (EPC) located in her electorate. Tweddle has been supporting new parents, babies and toddlers for more than 100 years, and while not located in Northcote it has special significance to many families in my community. Last year a full quarter of all participants in Tweddle’s day program in Footscray came from the Darebin area. Any parent can tell you how tumultuous those early years can be. Families at Tweddle are supported with sleep and settling, bonding and mental health. Local families are also benefiting from Tweddle’s residential and in-home supports delivered by highly skilled nurses, social workers and parenting practitioners. Parenting is tough. It can be frightening, it can be isolating and it can be consuming. The Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System highlighted that women are at greater risk

MEMBERS STATEMENTS 2552 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 of developing mental illness during the perinatal period than at any other time. It recommended dedicated infant, child and family mental health and wellbeing services, a recommendation embraced by my community of Northcote, particularly as the inner north is impacted by growing demand for them. The first thousand days are critical to the development and wellbeing of babies and toddlers, so services like Tweddle are vital to ensuring parents and kids get the support they need. Tweddle is one of only three EPCs currently operating in Victoria but is soon to be joined by seven more as we expand this critical network. A huge thankyou to CEO Jacquie O’Brien and her amazing team for the important work they do every day supporting our local babies and families. I am looking forward to working to amplify important services like this one close to home. CLIMATE CHANGE Mr HIBBINS (Prahran) (13:15): I thank everyone in the Prahran community that has signed the Prahran climate emergency declaration so far. Our community’s voice is loud and clear. We are in a climate emergency. We are already experiencing the devastating effects of climate change, and we need our governments to go further and faster. Continuing to burn coal, opening up our state for gas drilling, logging our native forests and putting a new tax on electric vehicles as the government is doing here in Victoria are just not an option. The solutions are here and now. We have to go beyond coal and gas. We have to get to 100 per cent renewable energy. It is achievable. We can cut transport emissions and transform our homes and our communities. I will continue to bring our community’s demand for strong climate action here to Parliament. HOMELESSNESS WEEK Mr HIBBINS: This week is Homelessness Week, and a wealthy society like ours should not have people without safe, secure places to call home. Yes, we need to build more homes for people in need. Yes, we need to end unfair tax breaks that lock people out of home ownership. Yes, we need to give renters a better deal, and yes, we need to end homelessness once and for all. If we could afford to put people up during the lockdown last year, we can afford to do it permanently. No-one should be without a roof over their head. HOMELESSNESS WEEK Mr HALSE (Ringwood) (13:16): This week is national Homelessness Week 2021, an annual occasion to highlight the over 115 000 Australians who are homeless on any given night. This year’s theme is ‘Everyone needs a home’, and it reflects the urgent need for social and affordable housing right across our country. The COVID-19 crisis has highlighted this urgent need throughout our country, and that is exactly why the Andrews Labor government is acting to build more than 12 000 social and affordable housing dwellings across the state of Victoria as part of our Big Housing Build. This $5.3 billion commitment is the largest social housing commitment that our nation has ever seen. It eclipses the $5 billion that the Rudd government, the then federal government, delivered at the beginning of its term over a decade ago. We know that the most important things that people can have are a roof over their head and a secure job, and this government is partnering with builders and workers right across this state to make sure that everyone has that basic right to have a secure place to call home. This week I want to thank those from the Council to Homeless Persons and those in my electorate from Uniting who are doing some great work with those who are homeless as we get on with the job of building more homes. WARRANDYTE ELECTORATE TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE Mr R SMITH (Warrandyte) (13:18): Today I bring the attention of the house to the inadequacy and inaction of the Minister for Public Transport and Minister for Roads and Road Safety. I actually believe the minister’s heart is in the right place, but it is clear that his department and agencies know exactly what they have to tell him in order to keep their workload to a minimum. Whilst the Warrandyte electorate might not have any of the so-called Big Build items or opportunities for the

MEMBERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2553 minister to dust off his hard hat and hi-vis vest, this should not allow the government to ignore important local issues which have been raised by my residents. Routinely the minister fails to answer most correspondence inside of two months, and if he does respond, it is usually after at least a couple of follow-up letters from me desperately trying to prompt some sort of response. Then typically when I do receive a response the minister will simply dismiss the concerns as not warranted, despite the fact that the people driving on these roads every day are actually raising matters of genuine concern about their safety. In just one example, the minister has outright ignored the pleas from over a thousand residents that the Five Ways intersection in Warrandyte South is dangerous, because from his electorate over in Niddrie he apparently knows better. And when asked to review the current bus services in Wonga Park the minister simply told me about the one service that already exists, that everyone knows about, and claimed it was adequate when the locals say it is not. It may be a stretch, but all my residents are asking is for the minister do his job: listen to the concerns of my locals and work on improving local roads and public transport in the electorate of Warrandyte. That is all they are asking. My community deserves a whole lot better than what they are getting from this minister. JESSICA BENNETTS Mr EDBROOKE (Frankston) (13:19): I would like to extend a huge congratulations to our local superstar, Jessica Bennetts from John Paul College, for her 2020 VCE Premier’s award for further mathematics. Now, I like mathematics—I am sure you like mathematics too, Deputy Speaker—but to get a Premier’s VCE award for further mathematics is a great thing. I would also like to extend my deepest respects and say thank you to all VCE students during 2020 and 2021 for their commitment in such tough circumstances. FRANKSTON ELECTORATE Mr EDBROOKE: I would like to extend huge congratulations to Frankston City Council and the members of the Frankston Revitalisation Board. Seven years ago, in deep consultation with our community, we established the long-term goal of budgeting $63 million of very hard fought for state government funding as a catalyst for revitalisation and private investment in Frankston. From the new Frankston station to the Overton Road level crossing removal to the Young Street redevelopment, the CBD revitalisation, the Chisholm TAFE stages 1 and 2, new station parking and the new half-a- billion-dollar hospital redevelopment, we have not wasted a moment. And if you look at the front page of the Leader newspaper today, you will see that Frankston is leading the way in south-east Melbourne’s construction boom, so our vision is absolutely coming together. COVID-19 VACCINATIONS Mr EDBROOKE: I am also so proud of the Frankston community. We have administered 1200 vaccines a day at the Bayside Centre Peninsula Health Frankston vaccination hub—a big shout- out to all those health workers there. COVID-19 Mr T BULL (Gippsland East) (13:21): The government’s requirement that COVID test results be obtained by interstate trucking drivers and those attending the snowfields is not being matched by the provision of testing facilities within my electorate. Truckies and business operators in my area have contacted my office saying that it is actually strangling the freight business and also having a major impact on those intending to attend the snow season. Non-symptomatic people cannot obtain a COVID test, and they are often being told to book private appointments at their own expense. Now, the biggest problem with truckies is they often have a short time frame between trips. They want to spend that time with their families, not lined up trying to get a COVID test. Rapid antigen tests can produce a result in 15 to 30 minutes. They are 95 per cent accurate and they are quick. They allow truckies to get on with

MEMBERS STATEMENTS 2554 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 the job and people to attend the snowfields. At the very least, if the government is going to introduce these provisions, it needs to introduce the testing that allows people to go about their business. UTILITY RELIEF GRANT SCHEME Mr T BULL: Numerous low-income households in my electorate rely on LPG, firewood and generators for their heating and cooking. A number qualify for the non-mains utility grant relief. But if you want to apply, you have got to get on the phone and talk, and there are very, very long delays with the concessions information line. I call on the government to address this delay. RON JORDAN Ms WARD (Eltham) (13:23): I want to acknowledge the sad passing of Ron Jordan on 19 July this year. At only six weeks Ron’s parents signed him up to the ALP, in 1940. A true believer, it was a membership he proudly held all of his life. Growing up in Coburg, Ron finished high school in year 10 and went on to complete a carpentry apprenticeship. He held positions at two unions before, in 1971, being elected as president of Trades Hall Council at 31—the youngest ever, and two years younger than his father had been as president. Ron became an industrial officer for Trades Hall and was involved in the 1973 beer dispute, which led to panic drinking flooding through Melbourne. Ron also worked for the state government between 1982 and 1985. In 1996 Ron purchased Cedar Stationery in Eltham, loving being able to work with three of his four children, before retiring in 2010. Ron married his wife, Helen, in 1964, raising Mandy, Tracey, David and Lisa together in Montmorency. He loved being a grandfather and took the name ‘Grandy’ like his father had before him. Sadly, we were unable to celebrate Ron’s 80 years of membership of the ALP because of the COVID pandemic. Ron, we are grateful for your decades of devotion to the Labor cause, and we thank your family for sharing you with us. BANYULE COMMUNITY HEALTH Ms WARD: Thank you to Banyule Community Health for their recent support of our local community—a big-shout out to BCH’s COVID-19 testing and vaccination teams for their quick response in setting up a walk-through testing site in Eltham to meet the demand from our community. In such a short time BCH was the pop-up walk-in site. They tested over 2000 people, making them the most popular walk-in site in the state. PROFESSOR DAVID LINDENMAYER Mr BLACKWOOD (Narracan) (13:24): This house needs to be aware that I have further evidence that Professor David Lindenmayer from the Australian National University is falsely claiming peer- review status for his research into native forest logging practices. Once again he has been exposed as a fraud. ABC Victoria’s Statewide Drive on 20 and 21 April covered peer reviewed research by ANU Professor David Lindenmayer at al that found widespread and systematic illegal logging by VicForests on steep slopes in water catchment areas. The program failed to inform listeners that the Victorian government’s Office of the Conservation Regulator (OCR) investigation found that concerns of systemic and widespread breaching of slope prescriptions in water catchments by VicForests could not be substantiated. Further, the program of 21 April did not provide the important context that the OCR found only two breaches … and the program misrepresented the position of the OCR. The omission of material context and the misrepresentation of the OCR’s investigation, together with the lack of due impartiality in comments made by the presenter were in breach of the ABC’s editorial standards for accuracy and impartiality. On 21 July Nicole Chvastek on ABC’s PM apologised, saying:

While the Office of the Victorian conservation regulator’s investigation of these allegations found VicForests breached the law at two locations, it decided not to take action, saying that it found no evidence of demonstrable environmental harm.

MEMBERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2555

We should have made clear in our coverage of Professor Lindenmayer’s research that the Regulator told the ABC that concerns of systemic and widespread— (Time expired) CRANBOURNE YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE Ms RICHARDS (Cranbourne) (13:26): I am delighted to update the house on the amazing success of the Cranbourne youth advisory committee. This group of outstanding young people has been doing some extraordinary heavy lifting, and I could not be prouder. In consultation with the Minister for Youth, we formed the committee several months ago and have received an outstanding response. Today I have the pleasure of updating the house that the committee itself used democratic processes to choose a topic of interest and universally settled on youth mental health. But this is not a talkfest. I want to thank and acknowledge for their incredibly difficult and heavy work Lilly Hopp, Ellen Streat, Jorja Roscoe, Deliza Mant, Mark Leirum, Amaris Coste, Harman Hans, Jaismeen Kaur Handa, Prathana Maharaj, Elijah Jones, Ozlem Coruk, Benazir Razoli, Amogha Venkatesh, Joseph Ulale and Rumaan Baryalai, and it is so ably chaired by Alessandra Soliven. The schools who have participated include Casey Grammar, St Peter’s, Lighthouse Christian College, Cranbourne East Secondary College and Cranbourne Secondary College, and of course we have students who attend Alkira Secondary College. But wait, there is more: I have been very fortunate to have the wisdom of Alvin Reyes in his role on the committee, who has experience as a mental health nurse and has provided the necessary support. I am incredibly proud of this group, and I will be looking forward to their submission. GEORGIA GRIFFITH Mr HAMER (Box Hill) (13:27): Congratulations to Mont Albert local Georgia Griffith from the Box Hill Athletic Club, who represented Australia in Monday’s women’s 1500-metre heat at the Tokyo Olympics and ran a season-best time. Georgia had to overcome a series of injuries over the past year just to qualify for the games, and she has done her club and country proud. BOX HILL ELECTORATE SCHOOLS Mr HAMER: Students in the Box Hill electorate have again demonstrated their academic prowess with four local students receiving Premier’s VCE Awards for being amongst the state’s best performing VCE students. Congratulations to Magnus Andersson from Box Hill High School for his award in engineering studies, Brayden Buick from Box Hill High School for his award in systems engineering, Linda Chen from Box Hill High School for her award in laboratory skills and Claire Morgan from Koonung Secondary College for her award in environmental science. A special shout-out to Box Hill Senior Secondary College and their year 12 captains Grace Graham and Owen Mulady and year 11 captain Lewis Stevenson for their video messages of encouragement which were posted onto the school’s Facebook page during the recent lockdown. Lockdowns have been especially tough on students, who have had to move in and out of remote learning and missed out on seeing their mates. The leadership that you have shown during these difficult times is a credit to you and your school community. THE ORCHARD PROVIDORE Mr HAMER: Every Saturday morning local business the Orchard Providore teams up with Box Hill Baptist Church and local volunteers to deliver a delicious community breakfast of bread rolls, fruit and treats, all rescued food from local businesses that would otherwise go to waste. This terrific community initiative helps people in need as well as reducing our food waste. In the words of its founder, Jo: when life gives you lemons, you make the world’s best lemon butter.

MEMBERS STATEMENTS 2556 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

POWER SAVING BONUS PROGRAM Mr TAK (Clarinda) (13:29): Over the past few months it has been my pleasure to help many of my constituents to access the Andrews Labor government’s power saving bonus program. This important initiative is helping to reduce the cost of energy for Victorians doing it tough, with one-off $250 payments to help with energy bills, and the program has been gratefully received in the Clarinda district. Since February our office has helped hundreds of constituents with access to the program, and we will continue to support our vulnerable households who have experienced or continue to experience energy bill stress. The bonus is available to any household with a Victorian electricity account who holds a pensioner concession card or receives JobSeeker, Austudy, Abstudy or youth allowance. It will be available throughout 2021 and will provide immediate financial relief to more than 900 000 Victorian households. The global pandemic and Victorians spending more time at home to keep us all safe have meant that many people have had higher power bills. So to anyone in the Clarinda district who needs a hand with the application process: please reach out, please get in touch. We are more than happy to help, and I hope too this $250 bonus will help to take pressure off the household bills for some of those in Clarinda doing it tough. MORDIALLOC ELECTORATE LEVEL CROSSING REMOVALS Mr RICHARDSON (Mordialloc) (13:30): Parkdale was named just over 100 years ago after early homesteader William Parker, when engineers decided to build a beautiful railway station alongside a cluster of bayside shopping strips. That beautiful community around Parkdale has continued to grow into the wonderful, vibrant community we love and appreciate and cherish—a true village vibe. As we continue to grow, so too do the impacts of those dangerous level crossings that abut the township on the Frankston train line. These crossings carry some 20 000 vehicle movements each and every day. We have heard of tragedies before and near misses across this line, and as our Parkdale community expands and grows, this risk is increasing as well. That is why I was so pleased to join the Premier recently to announce that the Warrigal Road and Parkers Road level crossings will be gone for good as part of the Andrews government’s recent $2.5 billion stimulus package to remove 85 level crossings by 2025. This allows us to push even harder for a level-crossing-free Frankston line in future. On the advice of engineering experts at the Level Crossing Removal Authority it has been recommended that these level crossings be replaced with an elevated rail bridge. I am very keen for the community consultation and engagement to get underway on these projects as soon as possible—which need to incorporate and consider the beautiful Parkdale village and vibe, the lovely shopping strip, all those traders and businesses and all the residents in the area. This is a once- in-100-year opportunity to set our community up for years to come and into the future. It means 21 level crossings will be gone for good on the Frankston train line and 13 brand new stations will be built for our community into the future. Following statements incorporated in accordance with resolution of house today: COVID-19 Ms CUPPER (Mildura)

I want to address the significant ordeal my community has endured in the last 2½ weeks, and express my pride in Mildura’s response. For the first time in 17 months, a COVID-19 case hit our region. A man in his thirties innocently attended a footy match at the MCG, returned to Mildura and tested positive a week later. From the moment that case of the delta variant was made public, our community leapt to action. We waited with bated breath as the list of exposure sites grew. In all there were ten; many were significant venues.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2557

55 hospital staff were forced into isolation, putting immense strain on available services. More than 700 people were forced to quarantine after attending tier 1 exposure sites. Lines for drive-through testing stretched for kilometres. In the earliest days, some people were turned away three or four times due to overwhelming demand. Others waited as long as 11 hours in line to get tested. Not only did we have to contend with the delta variant, but our location made bringing relief services in an incredibly challenging task. Weather conditions on the highest demand days were atrocious, with sideways rain and unseasonably cold temperatures. Our community owes a lot to the frontline health staff, including the extra health professionals from Shepparton, Bendigo and Swan Hill. And yet despite everything thrown at us, a community who had avoided an active COVID case for 17 months, we got through it. Our highest active case total was 5, all household contacts of the initial case. I say it a lot, that we’re Victorians too. And there’s no better demonstration than this significant achievement: we did it for us, and we did it for you. NICOLE-HAZEL PARULAN Ms HENNESSY (Altona)

I rise today to applaud and acknowledge a brilliant young person in my electorate who has been recognised with a 2020 VCE Premier’s award for music performance. Mount St. Joseph Girls’ College’s Nicole-Hazel Parulan is no doubt a huge source of pride for her school community, friends and family. This achievement and these awards are a testament to how well Victorian students, teachers and school communities adapted to the challenges of a global pandemic, and still produced outstanding results. Nicole-Hazel’s success is a credit to not only their hard work and abilities, but also to the supportive school community at Mount St Joseph in Altona. So, well done to everything Mount St Joseph’s teachers did to support this top-performing 2020 student who worked incredibly hard to achieve these amazing results in their final year of school. Congratulations again to Nicole-Hazel Parulan. It’s wonderful see your hard work recognised with a VCE Premier’s award. ALTONA ELECTORATE SCHOOLS Ms HENNESSY (Altona)

I also want to acknowledge the many students and their teachers and families across the Altona district who completed their final year of schooling in 2020. The determination you displayed and the level-headedness with which you made your way through such an unprecedented year will continue to serve as a source of strength for us all. Business of the house ORDERS OF THE DAY Mr PAKULA (Keysborough—Minister for Industry Support and Recovery, Minister for Trade, Minister for Business Precincts, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Racing) (13:32): I move:

That the consideration of government business, orders of the day 1 to 4 inclusive, be postponed until later this day. Motion agreed to.

BILLS 2558 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Bills POLICE INFORMANTS ROYAL COMMISSION IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR BILL 2021 Second reading Debate resumed on motion of Ms HUTCHINS: That this bill be now read a second time. Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (13:33): I rise to make a contribution on the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021. This is a very, very important moment in time for all of us, particularly the way our legal system, our law and order, is managed in the state and the way our police force do their business. There has probably never been a more controversial time in the history of Victoria than what we saw with the police informant Lawyer X, Gobbo, referred to by all of those names—that period in time. I think the time spans about 26 years from the time that Nicola Gobbo first became active and became a lawyer as such until ultimately becoming an informer for Victoria Police whilst a barrister and representing some of the most colourful individuals—that is probably the most polite way to say it—that we have seen, very much the criminal underworld in this state, and effectively playing two sides of the game. It undermined our legal system. It undermined our justice system. It certainly put a stain on Victoria Police, which, for its reputation, has a lot of work to be done to reinstate that reputation that unfortunately has been tainted during this time. The bill today is in relation to a recommendation from the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants, which had 111 recommendations that stemmed from its inquiry over just on two years, which looked at this tainted past and which looked at what we need to do to rebuild to ensure that we do not cross the line between what is fairness and what is the right that goes back historically to the initial days in which the legal system was first created in the UK in terms of everybody having a right to representation in a fair way and fairness at the law. And we have seen certainly issues around that in terms of questioning those that are above the law by those that actually are employed to carry out the law. Victoria Police members wear a badge and sign an oath that is about upholding the right. Its code of ethics is all about safety and fairness, and I am sure there are many fine members serving in Victoria Police that do an amazing job in upholding the right and keeping us safe and risking their lives each and every day and that understand that there is a limit in terms of what one must do in terms of ensuring we are safe and that there is a line that you do not cross. That line was crossed, and unfortunately many of those cases—I think some 100 cases—were questioned because we had a number of people that were sentenced following questionable evidence because Lawyer X crossed the line and effectively was working for her clients and working for the state, and that is a conflict which just should never happen. So the legislation is to effectively do two primary things: firstly, to monitor and assess the adequacy of the implementation of all the royal commission’s recommendations—111 of them—during the implementation process; and there is a reporting function, which is to report to the Attorney-General on the progress of the adequacy of the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. That is very, very important, and on top of that there is an ability for the implementation monitor, which is being established, to table in Parliament a report annually as to the progress of this. This monitor is being established for four years in the first instance, and one of the things that I will be proposing an amendment for a bit later on during my contribution today will be that the timing of the report to Parliament should be considered before the election period, because the timing currently would sit after the election period—by the end of November—and we believe that is just not good enough. We have had enough time. The government’s election commitment was to do this royal commission, which we think is fair. It is very important that a royal commission was done here to get to the bottom of the mess, to clean up the mess and to ensure that integrity is restored back into our legal system and into our police force, but we believe that there has been sufficient time—and certainly four years

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2559 should be enough for a government that made an election commitment back in 2018—to report to the Parliament on its progress. So we think it is fair and reasonable for an amendment to be for the first reporting period to be prior to the election, and we will be proposing an amendment of that nature for the first one. And then we are happy for an annual report to then continue on in its normal time frame, as suggested by the government. The implementation monitor can do a number of things. They can compel information that is subject to an obligation to maintain secrecy or other restrictions on information imposed by or under an act or rule of law, including personal information and information that may identify individuals. Some context to this: this is the first tranche of legislation to give effect to the recommendations from the commission report of 30 November 2020, the final report of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants. This independent monitor, as I said, is a key element of that. So it does deliver on one of the 111 recommendations, and I am going to go through some of those shortly. Also, Sir David Carruthers, former chair of the New Zealand Independent Police Conduct Authority and a former judge of the New Zealand family and youth courts, was appointed as implementation monitor in February this year; former Justice Geoffrey Nettle, AC, QC, was appointed special investigator on 30 June this year; and further legislative provisions will be introduced later in 2021– 22, including establishment of the functions and powers of the special investigator. If I could say this: one of the things we think has been very tardy in terms of this is that we have not had an appointment of a prosecutor to actually start the ball rolling. The government has now said that this will happen towards the end of the year. It is very important because this was one of the key recommendations, that we start to do the work. There are a number of people effectively still employed within Victoria Police that are under question. We need to get to the bottom of this as quickly as possible. Every day that the special prosecutor is not out doing work and investigating the actions of those that were involved in this in the past is a day that is compromising the integrity of our police force and the legal system in this state. We would suggest that the special prosecutor should be moving a lot faster than it is, and we question why it has taken that long. The implementation of the recommendations, such as the appointment of the implementation monitor, is proceeding at a very slow pace. We would have expected to see this actual legislation before the winter recess. The government has had plenty of time to do this. As I said, it was an election commitment prior to the 2018 election. As I said, I think it is very, very important to restore confidence in our legal system. If I reflect—I was just thinking about this before I was up on my feet—every year we get to go and do the swearing in of the legal year, and I know the former Attorney-General has been to a number of those and I have attended a number of those on behalf of the opposition. They are very, very interesting because they bring together a whole range of people: those that are very experienced—lots of years under their belt, judges with very senior appointments—and lawyers that are really starting out and very fresh in their careers. You know that no matter who is in that room—excluding, unfortunately, the informant that has created a lot of this mess—everybody is there ultimately to see justice, to have a fire in their belly and, really, to fight for fairness. Whether it is people who pursue commercial or criminal law or social justice, right across the board it is just really interesting to hear that. I know how difficult these things would be for many of these individuals. That is their job—that is what they do and that is what they signed up for. No-one would like to see their profession tainted and a question mark held over it. That is why it is really, realty important that we do this and clean up the mess as quickly as possible. That is not to say that we be tardy about this. I think that is really important, particularly if there are people still in positions of power that are effectively compromised and caught up in a lot of this. Without naming individuals, there have certainly been a number of very, very senior members of our Victoria Police force that have been called into question over these activities. I know there have been former commissioners that have certainly been named publicly in terms of their questionable conduct, and these are the kinds of things that need to be investigated. They need to be investigated quickly. We need to get to the bottom of it so we can move on, so there can be some closure in terms of this

BILLS 2560 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 really tainted past, but also so there can be certainty in the future that we do not end up with this mess again. That is really, really important and that is something that I think we need to get on top of. Could I just look at some of the recommendations of the royal commission. As I said, the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants final report was handed down just over two years after it was first called to examine the Lawyer X scandal. Commissioner Margaret McMurdo, AC, said the Victorian government should appoint a special investigator, which is what we are now looking at, and they should have a number of powers and resources. There have been questions also in terms of the resources. There have been questions about funding with IBAC. I know IBAC has had reduced funding over recent period of time, and it is really important for these investigative organisations to have the funding necessary to be able to do their job. I know that we have raised these issues a number of times. One of the things as part of this is when Commissioner Margaret McCurdo first— Mr Pakula: McMurdo. Mr SOUTHWICK: McMurdo, thank you—raised her points she said that:

Police are not entitled to pursue suspects at any cost—they must comply with the law and use their powers in a fair and ethical way. The cost of the royal commission was $40 million, I believe. The recommendations of the royal commission include that lawyers be required to report the suspected misconduct of other lawyers through mandatory reporting and that the Victorian government introduce specific legislation to govern Victoria Police’s use of informers rather than relying on Victoria Police’s internal policies, which is really, really important. It is again about transparency. It is about not having the police force having their own set of rules that do not comply with the intended reasons for how particularly informants are used and how they are established, with no compromising situations like we have just had. Also one of the recommendations is that Victoria Police change their policies around managing informers, including having a maximum time in position; a requirement to reduce the risk of corruption; and that the anti-corruption body, IBAC, monitor the use of police use of informers with six-monthly inspections of relevant records with full access, accompanied by appropriately redacted public reports. This is important. We have got to maintain the privacy of very sensitive information. We understand that, especially with some of that information that IBAC is privileged with in terms of the information and the records Victoria Police have, there are sensitivities in terms of individual’s names getting out to the public, but the intended information is very important for the public to see, without sharing state secrets of maybe individuals that may or may not be compromised. There is a certain time and place for that, and the courts are the place to look at that. But certainly the public need to know. There cannot be secrecy and there must be transparency. That police informers are to be told that they can confidentially complain to IBAC if they are unhappy with their treatment is very, very important. We saw a lot of times with police informants and the way that it was being managed when there were a lot of members of Victoria Police that felt that they were compromised, that effectively their job was on the line if they did not comply, if they did not do what they were told to do. We know that there is a very hierarchical system in the way Victoria Police carries itself out, and we understand that is really important. I know that I have met with a number of members and former members of Victoria Police that have told me some of the sensitivities about this, particularly during their treatment in this period, and the way that they were treated. Some of these individuals were at one point at a very junior level but felt threatened in terms of compromise of their job and their careers if they did not listen to somebody with higher authority. They are some of the important things that the implementation monitor should be looking at in terms of reviewing, and some of those activities are still fresh and need to be properly scrutinised. Where there are people that have used their powers for evil and not for good in terms of the way the police informants program was managed, that should be brought to the surface and properly managed.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2561

Police informers are to be told also that oversight is to be brought whenever police want to register a police informer with access to confidential or privileged information. So a monitor outside of Victoria Police must also make submissions on the use of the informer before the registration is approved. Police officers are to be better trained in legal privilege, including what jobs attract legal obligations of confidentiality or privilege. I mean, that pretty much goes without saying. You would expect that that is the case as part of training. I think certainly Victorians would expect that it is simply not good enough for somebody to say, ‘Well, I didn’t realise that what I was doing was breaking the law’, particularly in these very, very sensitive matters where you are compromising witnesses potentially, compromising cases and putting a cloud over the whole legal system in the way things are being managed. You have got to understand what you are doing, and so that effectively should be built into the training process right from the very beginning. I would suspect that that is part of the training at the academy but also regular training that is ongoing as things change. That police officers be trained better in human rights, that lawyers be better trained in confidentiality requirements—again, you would expect that that would be pretty normal and that lawyers would understand that, but unfortunately, obviously, that is something that needs to be fixed. That the government remove the current rights of police officers or anyone to refuse to give information to a royal commission because of a claim of public interest immunity is very, very important. We cannot use the excuse that it is in the public’s interest not to give information. We need to get to the bottom of this kind of thing. That is what the royal commission established. That is what this particular bill is all about. It is about looking to ensure the implementation monitor can review past practices, can review current practices and can ultimately make a decision when it comes to practice to ensure that there is proper practice going forward. Another recommendation that I just want to highlight is that the implementation task force is created within three months to coordinate the actions set down. I am not sure whether that has happened; I think there is a bit of a timing issue with all of that. But the fact that the implementation task force are not up and running is really, really important. It comes to what I said right from the very beginning: a day lost in this is a day when we potentially do not have justice served and we have justice compromised. We cannot afford that. We cannot afford to have members of Victoria Police that were potentially tied up in all of this Lawyer X mess still in very high-ranking positions. I think that does not put any confidence in our Victorian police force going forward. We saw the Productivity Commission give a report on Victoria Police, and the confidence in Victoria Police is at a decade low—a decade low—and that is something that nobody wants. I think that is something that the government should not be proud of—the fact that our fine upstanding members of the front line, Victoria Police, put their lives on the line every single day and the public have lost confidence in them. The public have lost confidence in them, and this Lawyer X element is a big component. The way that lockdowns were enforced is another one: you know, the heavy-handed approach that was forced on many of our hardworking men and women of Victoria Police and the fact that at the commission towers in North Melbourne and Flemington—I mean, heaven forbid, those people were not even given any notice. They found out when they were watching the nightly news that they could not get out of their front door. I mean, they are some of the issues that have seen Victoria Police put well and truly behind. I do not think I have ever seen it. I do not think I had ever seen the situation of Blue Ribbon Day, when we had the memorial of Blue Ribbon Day, and the negative comments on Victoria Police’s Facebook page—never seen before. People had lost confidence. I spoke to the Chief Commissioner of Police about this, I spoke to the Police Association Victoria, and only recently—a few weeks ago—in a Public Accounts and Estimates Committee hearing the commissioner himself said that Victoria Police has a lot of work to do, a lot of catching up to do. That confidence has been smashed, and the government cannot walk away from that. The government must take responsibility for that. This bill, although you may not necessarily think it is tied up in all of that, is very much connected. It is all one and the same. People must have confidence in their legal system, and they must have

MEMBERS 2562 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 confidence in their police force. If you do not, you have a mess. The government cannot do anything, Victorians cannot do anything. There is no confidence, and law and order must be protected. It is what we go by, it is what we follow and it is ultimately what we all should be upholding. But that is questioned when people do the wrong thing. What we saw in terms of—26 years in the making— Nicola Gobbo was a whole lot of bad behaviour. We have got now two people that have been released because they were imprisoned under evidence that should never have been taken in the first place. Someone was playing two games. Now, we have had a royal commission that the government said they were going to do prior to 2018. We have now got an implementation monitor nearly three years on. We do not have one prosecutor doing any of the work. So at the moment people are still free to do what they like. We have got people in high-ranking positions that we still have not even investigated, and we still have the matter of confidence hanging over those individuals’ heads. So there is a lot of work to be done. This is really important; do not get me wrong. It is very, very important that we have such an implementation monitor. The royal commission was very important. We must get to the bottom of this, and that is what we certainly support. But as part of it, because I believe my amendments have arrived, I will after question time be able to afford the house with the amendments that we will be proposing from opposition to allow a reporting of the first report of the implementation monitor to be done before the election, not conveniently after the election, to allow Victorians at least to be able to see the work that has been done, the work that was promised by the government as part of the royal commission, that was certainly an election commitment back in 2018. I think it would be very, very unfair for us not to be able to see a report until conveniently after the election has been cast. They will be our amendments— Business interrupted under resolution of house today. Members MINISTER FOR PREVENTION OF FAMILY VIOLENCE Absence Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (14:01): I rise to inform the house that the Minister for Women, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Minister for Prevention of Family Violence will be absent from question time this week and that the Minister for Regional Development will answer questions for those portfolios. Questions without notice and ministers statements COVID-19 Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (14:01): My question is to the Minister for Health. The Therapeutic Goods Administration first approved a rapid antigen test in early 2021. These tests can deliver an accurate result in 15 minutes and are available on the supermarket shelves in Europe. Minister, if these tests are reliable enough for the world’s leaders at the recent G7 summit in Cornwall, why are they not reliable enough for Victorians? Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (14:02): Can I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question on rapid antigen testing. It may come as a big surprise to the Leader of the Opposition, but rapid antigen testing—indeed rapid testing—is a feature of the Victorian testing system. They are currently underway right now in a number of Victoria’s major tertiary hospitals with a very innovative company, Rhinomed, based in Cremorne, in the honourable member for Richmond’s electorate. We have right now the rapid antigen testing underway, and of course in addition to that we have rapid saliva testing underway every single day in our hotel quarantine. They form part of the so far 8.341 million tests that have been undertaken by Victorians over the course of this 18-month pandemic. Just in the last day we have had 22 217 tests delivered. Over the weekend we had 47 000 tests delivered, and I want to thank all those Victorians for doing their important part.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2563

But of course Victorians are able to do these tests because it is a trial test. You have to have the Therapeutic Goods Administration, which the honourable member referred to, approve the delivery mechanisms of how this happens, and at the moment that is not the case. So I look forward to the honourable opposition leader’s support for lobbying the commonwealth to make sure that we rapidly not just test, but we rapidly approve the various mechanisms that we have got available to Victorians and indeed to all Australians to make sure that rapid serial testing forms a part of the complex mix of testing. But I must make the point that PCR testing continues to be the diamond standard of how we go about testing. Rapid antigen testing continues to be an option—a small option. What we need to make sure is that the right test is used in the right set of circumstances, and the simple reliance on rapid testing with its predisposition to false test results needs to be taken into a risk equation. So with the greatest respect to the Leader of the Opposition I will continue to take my advice from clinicians and from our public health officials, and I look forward to his support for making sure that the full mechanism of how rapid testing is delivered in this state continues on its current path. Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (14:05): The use of rapid testing has been rolled out to Victoria’s courts. So, Minister, why is rapid testing good enough for our court system but not good enough to allow visitors into hospitals or aged care? Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (14:05): I refer to my answer to the honourable member’s substantive question in which, right now, rapid antigen testing is being trialled in our public hospitals. Mr M O’Brien: On a point of order, Speaker, rapid testing is being used in the courts. The question is: why isn’t it being used to allow visitors into hospitals and aged care? The SPEAKER: Order! The member knows a point of order is not an opportunity to repeat a question. MINISTERS STATEMENTS: LEVEL CROSSING REMOVALS Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (14:05): I am delighted to rise to update all the honourable members on the progress of our government’s level crossing removal program. I was down in Edithvale with the Minister for Transport Infrastructure and Leader of the House and the member for Mordialloc just a few days ago to celebrate the 50th set of boom gates—not quite the 50th level crossing, but the 50th set of boom gates—gone! Gone—a feature of the past, not part of our modern, safe public transport and road network. I was also able at that very important occasion—because this program of course is running 12 months ahead of schedule, not 50 gone by the end of 2022 but 50 gone very, very soon, in the next few months. That is 46 gone: 50 gates gone but 46 level crossings removed, another 20 under construction, tens of thousands of livelihoods depending on it, and that is not just pay packets and it is not just construction workers. It is tens of thousands of families who know that they can spend and invest with confidence, that know they can provide for their families with certainty. That underpins demand and our collective economic growth and our good fortune as an entire state. But I was able to add to this impressive agenda, an agenda that has expanded—power upgrades, signalling upgrades, 20 MCGs worth of open space, new stations the length and breadth of metropolitan Melbourne. I was able to add to this agenda, as ambitious and impressive as it already is, another 10 level crossings, taking it to 85 level crossings gone by— Mr M O’Brien interjected. Mr ANDREWS: Well, the Leader of the Opposition opposes all of these projects—always has and always will. And let the record show that you are opposed to just about everything. Mr M O’Brien: On a point of order, Speaker, the Premier is not allowed to verbal or attack the opposition during question time. Get him to bring it back to actually a minister’s statement.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS 2564 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Ms Allan interjected. Mr M O’Brien: I know he has been away for a while. He can remember the standing orders surely. The SPEAKER: Order! I heard the point of order. I do not need the Leader of the House’s assistance. I ask the Premier not to attack the opposition, and I ask the opposition leader not to interject across the table. Mr ANDREWS: I have not forgotten how easily riled up you are. Goodness me! Rapid? Mr Rapid over here today. The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier, through the Chair. Mr ANDREWS: Maybe we should have some rapid testing in your party room and have a full meeting of your party room. The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier’s statement has concluded. COVID-19 Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (14:08): My question is to the Minister for Health. Epidemiologists have called for rapid tests to be rolled out across businesses, hospitals, schools and at state borders. Professor Marylouise McLaws has said some rapid tests are more than 99 per cent accurate and regular testing increases their effectiveness. Why won’t the government listen to experts such as Professor McLaws and deliver the widespread rollout of rapid testing as part of a plan to reopen Victoria and keep us open? Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (14:09): Can I thank the Leader of the Opposition. In terms of the advice that this government gets on rapid antigen testing and testing more broadly, we speak, oddly enough, to a whole range of people. The Doherty Institute, for instance, are involved every step of the way in advising this government around technology options that are out there, technology options including rapid antigen testing. And the honourable Leader of the Opposition might be well served to perhaps visit the Doherty Institute’s website and look at some of the material that is publicly available there about how rapid antigen testing is dealt with in such a way as part of a broader risk matrix. This government supports the use of rapid antigen testing and rapid saliva testing and a whole range of testing mechanisms in the context of a wider pattern of testing. It is so important to get rapid antigen testing right in the context of wider delivery of testing. Mr M O’Brien: On a point of order, Speaker, the minister is debating the question. The question relates to why the government is refusing to have a rollout—an actual rollout—of rapid testing across Victoria to keep us open. I have quoted Professor Marylouise McLaws, who the minister has failed to refer to. The SPEAKER: Order! The substance of the question was ‘Why won’t the government listen to experts?’ as the member put the question, and the minister is being completely relevant to the question. Mr FOLEY: I think if anyone is being verballed here it is probably epidemiologists such as Professor McLaws, frankly, because I know that the contribution that senior epidemiologists make is in the context of how rapid antigen testing forms part of a serial testing regime. It does not form a one- off test situation. If you want accurate one-off tests, that is why you go for PCR diamond-standard testing. In the context of over 8 million tests done in this state you want the most accurate material there for when it is delivered, and that is what the PCR test is. But of course rapid testing of all sorts of mechanisms forms a part, particularly as we emerge, we trust, under the Prime Minister’s and national cabinet’s four-phase process. Rapid testing will and is already forming part of that pathway out. In terms of how that works, we will work on the basis of advice from public health experts such as the Doherty Institute, such as the world-leading epidemiologists that we

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2565 actually have right here in Melbourne. We will take their advice as to what is the best, safest and most secure route to make sure that testing continues to play an important part in our pandemic response. I just take the last moments available to me to really thank those testing professionals and pathology workers who have, month in, month out, turned around record numbers of tests well in advance of the national benchmarks. Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (14:13): University of Melbourne epidemiologist Professor Tony Blakely said rapid antigen testing at the border could help mitigate the danger of COVID coming into Victoria. Victoria’s most recent lockdown was sparked by COVID- positive removalists travelling from Sydney. Will the government now introduce rapid testing at Victoria’s border to immediately detect cases such as these to avoid future lockdowns? Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (14:13): I think I will genuinely offer the Leader of the Opposition a briefing with the Doherty Institute on this matter because, firstly, the epidemiologist that the honourable Leader of the Opposition referred to is part of the Doherty Institute’s and the University of Melbourne’s ecology. But what we need to understand is how rapid testing, as part of a serial of tests for the same people over short periods of time, forms part of an ecology of how testing operates. If you test, for instance, a removalist once on their way into Victoria, your chances of getting a false report off that test are quite large, are quite significant. If you want to stake the welfare of Victorians on one rapid antigen test, then you are a very brave public health official and you are putting the welfare of Victorians at risk. It is a desperate political stunt. MINISTERS STATEMENTS: VICTORIAN GAMBLING AND CASINO CONTROL COMMISSION Ms HORNE (Williamstown—Minister for Ports and Freight, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Fishing and Boating) (14:15): I rise to update the house on the Andrews Labor government’s work to strengthen casino and gaming regulation in Victoria. This morning I announced an overhaul of the current regulatory model. We will establish a new fit- for-purpose gambling and casino control commission. It will have a dedicated specialist division focused on holding the state’s casino to account. The structure of this commission is based on advice from Deborah Cope, who was tasked to provide independent recommendations on the best model to provide stronger, more focused regulation of Victoria’s casino. Unlike the existing regulator, the new body will not regulate liquor licensing. Instead it will regulate our casino and gambling operators, providing that sharp focus that we need. Under the new commission, the dedicated casino regulation division will sit within the new regulator and ensure that the casino operator is held to account. It will have specialist leadership and staff, as well as access to shared resources and gambling and licensing expertise from the broader regulator. The new commission will also have a strong focus on harm minimisation. Further details of the new regulatory arrangements will be finalised over the coming months and take into account the findings of the Royal Commission into the Casino Operator and Licence. We said we would take action to strengthen the casino oversight, and that is exactly what we are doing. We will not tolerate unethical practices in the gambling industry. The fit-for-purpose commission will provide robust regulation. Let us not forget that those opposite presided over the botched merger of liquor and gaming regulation on top of doing a dodgy deal with Crown to extend their licence, give them more poker machines and tables, and leave the state with a liability of $200 million.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS 2566 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

COVID-19 Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (14:17): My question is for the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events. Now, Professor— Members interjecting. Mr M O’BRIEN: They might want to listen to this one, Speaker. Members interjecting. The SPEAKER: Order! The house will come to order. The Leader of the Opposition has the call. Order! Leader of the House! The Leader of the Opposition has the call. Mr M O’BRIEN: Professor Sharon Lewin of the Doherty Institute and her colleagues recently tested one of the rapid antigen tests licensed for use in Australia and found that just four in 10 000 tests will return a false positive. The study also found the rapid antigen test picked up 100 per cent of COVID cases among people who had had symptoms in the last seven days. Minister, why wasn’t rapid testing used at the MCG to help detect the positive COVID case which forced 15 000 people into isolation? Mr PAKULA (Keysborough—Minister for Industry Support and Recovery, Minister for Trade, Minister for Business Precincts, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Racing) (14:18): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question, and I am sure the Premier is looking forward to the member for Ripon’s question number 5. The Minister for Health has already dealt with the substantive issues in regard to rapid antigen testing and the fact that at this stage—whilst it is a useful tool, a tool that is used in certain circumstances—it does not have the same efficacy or accuracy as PCR testing. And before you were to use rapid antigen testing in an environment where there are literally tens of thousands of people, you would need to have a far greater degree of confidence in the accuracy and the efficacy than you do today. You would only require, I say to the Leader of the Opposition, one person to be positive when they have tested negative and the efficacy is completely overridden. And in fact on the night in question it was indeed one person; that was all it took. Mr M O’BRIEN (Malvern—Leader of the Opposition) (14:19): Yesterday the minister flagged the possible return of crowds to the AFL this weekend. Will the government immediately roll out rapid testing at these games to better protect the lives and livelihoods of Victorians? Mr PAKULA (Keysborough—Minister for Industry Support and Recovery, Minister for Trade, Minister for Business Precincts, Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister for Racing) (14:19): Well, first of all a correction: we are not talking about the return of crowds this weekend. The Leader of the Opposition, I know, has got his talking points for the day, but the notion that rapid antigen tests could be rolled out in a matter of days in an environment where there are tens of thousands of people, potentially, is simply not realistic. We see rapid antigen testing in the same way as potentially in the future vaccine passports—as one of the suite of measures that governments not just here but around the country might be able to use to make those major public events safer. But it is not acceptable, it is not realistic, just because it is the opposition’s talking point for the day, for these things to be rolled out on a massive scale in a matter of days, as the opposition leader quite falsely asserts is possible. MINISTERS STATEMENTS: LEVEL CROSSING REMOVALS Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop) (14:21): Well, we know that is it for your questions for today, so it is good that we have got order in the house. I am very delighted to join with the Premier and talk about our removal of now 85 level crossings across the city and the state and how they form a core component of the Andrews Labor government’s integrated transport planning for improving transport infrastructure across Victoria. The Premier has mentioned that as at last week we had removed 46 level crossings. Well, as of this morning the

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2567

47th level crossing has gone on the South Gippsland Highway at Dandenong South, and many members know that this is a crossing that sadly had a fatal history. But as of this morning that level crossing is gone and 31 000 vehicles are now travelling level crossing free, boom gate free, through this intersection. This level crossing is one of 22 that we are removing on the Pakenham line. Every single level crossing by 2025 will be removed on the Pakenham line, making Melbourne’s longest rail corridor level crossing free. It will also in 2025 join Cranbourne and Lilydale as level-crossing-free train lines, with the addition of an extra 10. From Beaconsfield to Mentone, from Calder Park to Keon Park, 10 more level crossings are being removed across the city, and importantly, they are supporting thousands and thousands of jobs—jobs in construction and jobs in small and medium-sized businesses as well in the supply chain. People who work in manufacturing, hospitality, IT—these are all people who are a valuable part of our level crossing removal machine, and now is precisely the time to make a conscious decision to get on and support these workers through the removal of more level crossings. It is thanks to the workers and thanks to the determination of the Andrews Labor government that we are well ahead of schedule: 47 level crossings have been removed in 6½ years—compare that to only seven in the previous decade. It demonstrates that it is only under Labor, under the Andrews Labor government, that we will keep on removing level crossings. RENTAL SUPPORT Mr HIBBINS (Prahran) (14:23): My question is for the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation. Minister, many people who rent their home are still facing financial and housing insecurity due to the pandemic, yet the government has not provided any specific measures to support them during the latest two lockdowns. Minister, why are people who rent their homes now being left behind in the government’s response to COVID? Ms HORNE (Williamstown—Minister for Ports and Freight, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Fishing and Boating) (14:23): I thank the member for his question. Obviously as we have continued to monitor the situation of people renting during the course of the pandemic, we have been responding to people that are of greatest need. One of the things that the Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2018 did was put in place more than 130 protections for some of our most vulnerable people who are renting. These include an amendment to ensure that people who are renting cannot be evicted for no reason whatsoever. We will continue to work with stakeholder groups and continue to monitor the situation, but at the moment we have got more than 130 protection measures there for some of our most vulnerable people. Mr HIBBINS (Prahran) (14:24): We welcome the reforms in the Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, but the reality is at the end of the day they do not protect you if you have lost income due to COVID and you cannot pay the rent, which is now unfortunately the case for many people who rent their homes. So I ask the minister: will the government now reintroduce the moratorium on evictions for renters who cannot pay the rent due to the pandemic and provide direct financial assistance so they are not left with massive rental debts? Ms HORNE (Williamstown—Minister for Ports and Freight, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Fishing and Boating) (14:25): I thank the member for his supplementary question. In terms of supporting people who cannot pay their rent, this is a government that has acted swiftly to ensure that there is more than $400 million of the Victorian business support package to support businesses and protect jobs. On top of that there is a temporary COVID disaster payment for eligible renters where people can access up to $750 a week if they have lost more than 20 hours of work. But please rest assured that if we need to do more, we stand ready to do so. MINISTERS STATEMENTS: MENTAL HEALTH IN SCHOOLS PROGRAM Mr MERLINO (Monbulk—Minister for Education, Minister for Mental Health) (14:25): Today I rise to update the house on the return last week of all students to classrooms across the state for face- to-face learning. Our students, principals, teachers, support staff, parents and carers have once again done a brilliant job at transitioning to remote and flexible learning across Victoria during the most

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS 2568 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 recent lockdown. Across our state there are countless examples—thousands of examples—of school staff reassuring, informing and often leading their local communities, ensuring students continue to receive the education that they deserve. I know it has been tough for everyone, but it is absolutely essential to follow the advice of our chief health officer to keep Victorians safe from the spread of this virus, particularly the delta variant. My message to Victorian students is simple: if you need support, your school is ready to help. The Andrews government is providing every single government secondary school and specialist school with a mental health practitioner that is ready and available when they need it. We are also expanding the mental health in primary schools pilot. We recently announced the largest ever investment in mental health support in schools with our $200 million School Mental Health Fund following a key recommendation of the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System. We are increasing the capacity of our Navigator program by a third, supporting at-risk students and expanding Lookout to support students in out-of-home care. Finally, we have more than 6000 tutors in place as well as existing teaching staff and education support staff who are focused on supporting students who need extra support. I am pleased to inform the house that during that period of remote and flexible learning our tutors also moved to remote learning so that they continue to assist students during the lockdown— dedicated individual and small-group tutoring to our kids who need it most, supporting students every day through the pandemic. GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE Ms STALEY (Ripon) (14:28): My question is for the Treasurer—sorry, the Premier. Members interjecting. Ms STALEY: You all knew anyway! Widespread focus group research was undertaken by Labor strategist John Armitage of Qdos on Victorians’ attitudes to the Premier and his performance. Why is the Premier making Victorian taxpayers pay for political research that should be paid for by the Labor Party? Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (14:28): Just confirming the question was to me? It was to me? Ms STALEY: It absolutely was for you. Mr ANDREWS: Thank you very much. That is good. Great to confirm that, member for Ripon. The answer to your question is: I am not, we are not—we have never done that. The arrangements— Members interjecting. Mr ANDREWS: Well, isn’t it funny that those opposite would laugh—such short, short memories. The arrangements that the member for Ripon actively mischaracterises are consistent—wholly consistent—with the way in which previous governments, going right back to the Kennett government, have conducted themselves. If the member for Ripon expects me to stand up here and apologise for listening to the Victorian community, do not hold your breath waiting for me to do that because I will not. I will not. If you want to know what previous governments did—if you want to know what previous Liberal governments did—then I suggest go and have a word to the member for Bulleen. He has got a little entry there in his CV; he was director of research for Jeff Kennett. I will venture a guess: he was not popping down to the library doing that sort of research. I think his research might have been wholly different, and wholly consistent with what this government does. Ms Staley: On a point of order, Speaker, the Premier’s answer is not consistent with the standing orders in various ways. He is debating the question, he is maligning a member who is not in the chamber and he is attacking the opposition. The SPEAKER: Order! I do not uphold the point of order. The Premier is being directly relevant to the question that has been asked.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AND MINISTERS STATEMENTS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2569

Mr ANDREWS: There is no doubt about that. I am not maligning anyone. If to simply refer to the fact that somebody used to work for the Kennett government is to malign them, well, I am terribly sorry. It is in his parliamentary handbook. It is on his website somewhere. He is the one talking about it, and I am just making the point: when he says he was the research director, I do not think he was going Dewey decimal style down to the local library doing that kind of research. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe it was dirt that he was digging, maybe it was that sort of research—or maybe it was attitude monitoring. Maybe it was attitude monitoring—Crosby Textor, so many pollsters. To open the door on this shows a galloping ignorance of what your own side have done for decades. I will not be lectured to on standards, on rapid testing. I tell you, the only thing you could lecture me on is the wearing of a tinfoil hat. The aluminium milliner over here, the conspiracy theorist in the library with a candlestick, no-one takes him seriously—not me, not anyone. Ms Staley: On a point of order, Speaker, now, of course I am not a contributing columnist of the government’s choosing, which was what the Premier chose to— The SPEAKER: Order! Is this a point of order? Ms Staley: Yes, it is. I am entitled to ask a question and not have the question debated or attacked, and I ask you to bring the Premier back. The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier has concluded his answer. I remind members not to attack people in the chamber. Ms STALEY (Ripon) (14:32): Why did the Premier’s personal political staff write research questions for Qdos and sit in to observe focus groups run by this Labor polling company if the research was not party political? Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (14:32): I wonder who wrote those questions today. Would it have been paid political staff, maybe, in the Leader of the Opposition’s office, maybe? Ms Staley: No. Mr ANDREWS: It was all your own work, was it? You might win the debating point, but I think you are worse off confessing that that was your own work. I think you are worse off confessing that was your own work. My staff in a day make a greater contribution to this state than all of this lot combined. They act appropriately at all times and in all ways, and if the member for Ripon—the conspiracy theorist writ large, alfoil herself—wants to make an allegation, she should get up and make it. The SPEAKER: Order! I warn the Premier against attacking members of the opposition and to refer to members by their correct titles. MINISTERS STATEMENTS: BUSINESS SUPPORT Mr PALLAS (Werribee—Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Industrial Relations) (14:33): This year alone the Andrews government has announced more than $1 billion in support to Victorian small- and medium-sized businesses and sole traders, including the business costs assistance program, the Licensed Hospitality Venue Fund, the business continuity support fund, the Small Business COVID Hardship Fund and of course the commercial tenancies relief fund arrangements. When the pandemic hit we moved swiftly and we pumped billions of dollars into the Victorian economy, supporting businesses and also ensuring that workers had the support that they needed when they needed it most. Throughout the pandemic we have stood by Victorian businesses every step of the way, and in doing so we have pumped $13 billion into support for both businesses and the community in response to the global pandemic. This government knows that exactly the best way to strengthen the economy is to beat the pandemic. I note that the Prime Minister said just recently that going hard and early is the best economic outcome, not just the best health outcome. Now, I know that the Prime Minister recently visited the UK. What I did not realise was that he must have visited Damascus on his way back. I am pleased to report that

CONSTITUENCY QUESTIONS 2570 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 because of this—the government’s short, sharp lockdown and our business support—businesses are now opening up and they are securing jobs for Victorians. Since September 2020 Victoria has added more than 240 000 jobs, more than any other state, with daylight second. Our unemployment rate has fallen to 4.4 per cent, well below the national average of 4.9 per cent and the second-lowest unemployment rate in the last decade. This pandemic has been tough on everyone, but while those opposite whine and peddle conspiracies, this government is supporting businesses and creating jobs. Ms Kealy: On a point of order, Speaker, I refer to question 5823, a constituency question asked on 4 May regarding cross-border rules, with a response due by 3 June. It was to the Minister for Health. I also raise number 5869, an adjournment matter to the Minister for Health raised on 20 May and due on 19 June regarding health care in the Wimmera region, and constituency question 5933 to the Minister for Industrial Relations, asked on 24 June, due on 24 July, around the labour hire authority. I ask you to direct the ministers to respond to those really important questions for my community. The SPEAKER: I thank the member for Lowan for that point of order. I will follow those matters up. Mr Wells: On a further point of order, Speaker, I have question 5885 to the Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers. It is an important point about visitors not being able to visit family members in care, and I would ask you to follow that up, please. The SPEAKER: I thank the member for raising that item. We will follow that matter up for him. Constituency questions RIPON ELECTORATE Ms STALEY (Ripon) (14:36): (5941) My question is to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, and it relates to the Ripon SES units of Ararat, Maryborough and Dunolly. Recently, on 29 July, there was an article in the Age that suggested that the United Firefighters Union is coming after the SES, so my question is: what action has the minister taken to protect the volunteers in my electorate in the SES from the predations of the UFU as indicated in this article, which shows that the UFU is seeking to paint the SES as unsafe and incompetent, clearly as the next front in their war against volunteers in emergency services? BAYSWATER ELECTORATE Mr TAYLOR (Bayswater) (14:37): (5942) My constituency question is for the Minister for Education. I rise to ask the minister to please provide me with information and detail on the current status of projects funded within the last two budgets at Fairhills High, Bayswater Secondary, Boronia West Primary, Templeton Primary and Heathmont College—I almost need a glass of water at the end of that sentence. Of course backing in our local schools for me is one of my greatest priorities. Getting a quality education gives you every chance in life, and ensuring our kids have 21st-century facilities is a part of making sure kids get a fair go. I have been proud to help secure over $50 million in our upgrades for schools across the community I proudly represent, and over the last two budgets the Andrews Labor government have been busy locally, with $8.07 million for Fairhills High, $12.43 million for Bayswater Secondary College, $2.5 million for Heathmont College, $9.189 million for Templeton Primary and $4.43 million for Boronia West. These schools are so deserving, and I was stoked to be able to announce funding for each and every single one. For near on three years I have worked side by side with the school community locally to deliver and get things done. I know there has been plenty happening, and we know there is always more to do. You will always see me out and about in our locals, talking them up and getting behind them. They deserve nothing less. I thank the minister for his consideration of my request and look forward to continuing to back in our schools each and every single day.

CONSTITUENCY QUESTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2571

LOWAN ELECTORATE Ms KEALY (Lowan) (14:38): (5943) My question is for the Premier. What is the government doing to fix the timber and other building product shortages deeply impacting the construction industry? My local builders are currently facing huge challenges. Diminishing supply and cost increases are putting builders out of pocket and out of business. Subcontractors and suppliers are then not paid, and it is leaving home owners financially stressed and putting their dream homes at risk of never being completed. Labor’s actions of winding down the sustainable timber industry in Victoria have reduced supply and driven up timber prices. The wind-down of Victorian manufacturing under Labor has resulted in an over-reliance on imported products. These supplies have been delayed by local port strikes. This critical shortage of building supplies is driving up build prices, leaving builders out of pocket and struggling to pay their bills to suppliers and subcontractors, and home owners facing lengthy delays and being hit with additional costs they simply cannot afford. So I ask the Premier: how is his government addressing this critical timber and other building supply shortages which put thousands of Victorian businesses, jobs and building projects at risk? HAWTHORN ELECTORATE Mr KENNEDY (Hawthorn) (14:39): (5944) My question is for the Minister for Education and is regarding the proposed VCAL reforms. The integration of VCAL into the VCE follows a review by former Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority CEO John Firth. I was pleased to chair the expert reference group for this review at the invitation of the minister, and I am proud of our implementation of its recommendations. In March I met with the principal of Hawthorn’s own SEDA College, which utilises student engagement with sport to provide vocational education with high success rates—a true leader in Victoria’s vocational education space and a demonstration of how vital vocational education is. My question is: how will the recommendations benefit not only the students at SEDA but all the schools in my electorate of Hawthorn? I look forward to the minister’s response. ROWVILLE ELECTORATE Mr WELLS (Rowville) (14:40): (5945) My question is to the Minister for Health. Minister, when will you release the health advice behind the latest lockdown restrictions, which do not allow Victorians to visit family and loved ones at home? Numerous constituents have contacted my office in relation to this ridiculous rule. As one constituent stated, ‘Why is it that you can be around strangers in a cafe, exercise gym or entertainment setting but can’t be at home with known family members?’. This makes life incredibly difficult for elderly people who feel much safer having visitors inside their home, as they know exactly who they are surrounding themselves with. Another constituent of mine wrote to me very distressed as her elderly mother, who recently moved into an aged-care facility, will not be allowed any visitors to help her settle into her new place or keep her company while she is mourning the recent death of her husband. These rules are tearing families apart and are particularly unfair on an already vulnerable elderly community. ST ALBANS ELECTORATE Ms SULEYMAN (St Albans) (14:41): (5946) My question is to the Minister for Small Business. My question is: what support is available for small businesses and sole traders in my electorate of St Albans to ensure that they have the assistance and support that they require? I know it has been a very tough period for mum-and-dad small businesses in my electorate and in particular sole traders, with the recent lockdown and the global pandemic impacting on their usual trading and operation. I know it has been extremely difficult, but our community has united and together we continue to work through and support each other during these very challenging circumstances. I have spoken to local traders and family businesses who have really been doing it tough, but they know that they are doing the right thing to get back to COVID normal and have been following the restrictions. Our local small businesses are important to our community for our traders in the heart of St Albans—(Time expired)

CONSTITUENCY QUESTIONS 2572 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

MELBOURNE ELECTORATE Ms SANDELL (Melbourne) (14:42): (5947) My constituency question today is for the Minister for Health, who is responsible for cemeteries in Victoria. I ask the minister: will this state government provide funding to improve the Melbourne General Cemetery in my electorate? The last 18 months have shown us all how much we need and value green open space, and in the inner city every single patch is precious. For residents in Princes Hill and Carlton North in particular the Melbourne General Cemetery has been a welcome respite during lockdown: a place to walk, reflect and spend time outdoors. But this historic place is a little worse for wear. While there are some green areas, it is largely barren, with a lack of tree cover or vegetation. Residents want to see the cemetery improved with new trees and plants; however, unfortunately the body that runs the cemetery say they do not have the funding they would need to do this. The Andrews government has shown strong support for local parks and green areas in the last few years. It would be great to see them continue this by supporting the greening of this iconic and historic place to honour those who have come before but also provide a beautiful respite and space for those to come. WENDOUREE ELECTORATE Ms ADDISON (Wendouree) (14:43): (5948) My question is for the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, regarding the upcoming Women’s Big Bash League matches to be held at the magnificent Eastern Oval on 13 and 14 November. I am so excited about welcoming some of the world’s best cricketers to Ballarat and seeing the next generation be inspired by our Renegades stars, like Jess Duffin. Will the minister please provide an overview of how these four WBBL matches will benefit the Ballarat community and our local economy? Ballarat has world-class sporting facilities, and we love to host elite sporting events, including AFL, A-League, Super Netball, NBL1 and Super Rugby. We do it well, and we welcome all codes. These games bring fans into our cities and revenue into our local businesses. Hosting the WBBL is already a great win for Ballarat. I look forward to taking my girls to these matches to be inspired by these great women cricketers. Go Renegades! BRIGHTON ELECTORATE Mr NEWBURY (Brighton) (14:44): (5949) The children in my community deserve to be safe— safe to take an afternoon walk and safe to enjoy our parks. On Saturday afternoon two 13-year-old girls were chased along the Elster Canal Path in Brighton by teens carrying a knife. The incident terrorised them. Disturbingly, last Saturday a similar incident occurred when two 10-year-old boys were set upon by a group of half a dozen teens on the canal path. The group also had knives. These crimes come on the back of violent crimes in bayside parks committed by gangs. Tragically, earlier this year a 15-year-old girl was sexually assaulted at Dendy Park in Brighton East, and teenage boys were seriously assaulted in other bayside parks. Then in May a local teenager was stabbed at Elsternwick Park in Brighton. It is the government’s job to make sure our community is safe and to ensure that law enforcement have the resources they need. Can the Premier inform me: what is Labor’s plan to stop violent crimes being committed against children in my community? BURWOOD ELECTORATE Mr FOWLES (Burwood) (14:45): (5950) My constituency question is for the Minister for Education. Minister, how will the Ashburton Primary School benefit from the Andrews state budget 2021–22 and its investment in the school? The Andrews Labor government is investing record funding in our schools to cement Victoria’s status as the Education State. The state budget invests $1.6 billion in building and improving schools, continuing the Andrews government’s work in laying the foundation for a bright future for all our kids. Other recent investments in the Ashwood-Ashburton education area include a new STEM facility at nearby Ashwood High. Modern learning environments help develop creative thinking and STEM literacy and inspire learning for life—critical skills for future success. By transforming schools the

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2573

Victorian government is transforming communities. By sharing sport, cultural and health facilities, schools become not just education facilities but genuine neighbourhood hubs. The investments we are making now into schools like Ashburton Primary will improve student outcomes in the classroom and in the playground. Bills POLICE INFORMANTS ROYAL COMMISSION IMPLEMENTATION MONITOR BILL 2021 Second reading Debate resumed. Opposition amendments circulated by Mr SOUTHWICK under standing orders. Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (14:46): The amendments that we are proposing are to:

Clause 28, page 18, lines 22 to 25, omit all words and expressions on these lines and insert— “Parliament— (a) for the reporting period 1 July 2021 to 30 June 2022, by 30 August 2022; or (b) for any other reporting period, by the later of— (i) each year by 30 November; or (ii) within 60 days after receiving an implementation report.”. The context of the amendments that the opposition are proposing is to ensure that, based on the election commitment by the Andrews Labor government to deliver this royal commission, the public get to see the first report by the implementation monitor prior to the 2022 election. This is fair. This is reasonable. It, I believe, honours an election commitment that the Andrews Labor government had made in particular to restore confidence in our legal system, which has been severely tarnished by the Lawyer X scandal, and confidence in Victoria Police, which has also been severely tarnished by the Lawyer X scandal. It is only right and fitting that the public get to see this report and that it is not hidden under the carpet prior to the election and not conveniently waited for until after the election. So I ask that the government, in committing to these changes, take up our amendment and give the public the transparency that they deserve. Mr McGUIRE (Broadmeadows) (14:48): Negotiation and power are at the heart of the relationship between police and informers. Between suspicion and evidence falls the shadow. The role of government, like Janus, is to act as the gatekeeper looking both ways at the use and abuse of such relationships to avoid this process being corrupted. It is important to recap the chronology of key events and the government’s decisive response. On 3 December 2018 the Victorian government announced the establishment of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants following the publication of a High Court decision which revealed former criminal defence barrister Ms Nicola Gobbo was a registered human source for Victoria Police. In response to this revelation the royal commission provided an independent inquiry into matters that go to the heart of Victoria’s criminal justice system and have spanned more than two decades. This period covered the so-called gangland wars in Melbourne, an era defined by murders, drug trafficking and, ultimately, high-profile convictions. The commission’s extensive and detailed inquiry uncovered significant historical failures in the criminal justice system. It made a total of 111 recommendations to address these failures and restore community confidence in the system. On 7 May this year the Attorney-General released the government’s response to the final report of the royal commission. Importantly, it was accompanied by an implementation plan and an $87.9 million funding package. Crucially this plan focuses on actions to implement the royal commission’s 54 recommendations directed to government. It also outlines the principle-based framework agreed by all other bodies responsible for the implementation of the remaining 57 recommendations.

BILLS 2574 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

To underscore the breadth of the government’s response I think it is important to go into a little bit of the detail of this package. There is almost $88 million in funding to go to the Department of Justice and Community Safety, the Office of Public Prosecutions, Victoria Legal Aid, the Victorian Legal Services Board and commissioner, Victoria Police, the Independent Broad-Based Anti-Corruption Commission and to the courts to support the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. As part of this funding more than $2 million has been committed to establish the office of the implementation monitor, whose role is defined by this legislation. A robust governance structure has also been established, and the government is working closely with all agencies with implementation responsibilities to ensure the failures uncovered are addressed. To achieve this result this legislation provides the implementation monitor with all necessary and reasonable powers required to fulfil this important role—this vital role—and to support all agencies with responsibilities for implementation as well. This is the approach the government has taken in response. To go to the role, the implementation monitor will lead the oversight of the royal commission’s recommendations and ensure that the acquittal of the recommendations delivers a results-focused attention to detail. Agencies that will be subject to the implementation monitor’s powers have acknowledged the important role of the implementation monitor in ensuring the royal commission’s recommendations are delivered in a manner that is timely and consistent with the royal commission’s outcomes focus. The government is committed to a collaboration in the implementation with all stakeholders to ensure the commission’s objectives are met and the circumstances that gave rise to the commission can never happen again. The royal commission recommended the government appointment of an implementation monitor within three months of its final report, and that has been done. The government has appointed Sir David Carruthers to the role. That was done in February this year. Following his appointment the bill establishes the statutory office of the police informants royal commission implementation monitor and ensures the implementation monitor has the reasonable and necessary powers as recommended by the royal commission to fulfil the role. In line with the royal commission’s observation, the government envisages that the implementation monitor’s role will be interactive over the course of the process and will not be restricted to the after-event style reporting on compliance. The royal commission recommended that the implementation monitor be supported by a small secretariat within the Department of Justice and Community Safety, which is being done. The bill provides for this important position for a period of no more than four years. The person taking on the role as defined under the bill must be qualified, have a strong understanding of multi-agency environments and knowledge of or experience in the subject matter of the royal commission’s recommendations. So that has all been done. That has been acquitted. One of the important aspects of this bill is that it codifies the independence of the implementation monitor. The bill stipulates that the implementation monitor is not subject to the direction or control of any person in respect of the performance and exercise of their functions, powers and duties, including the content of their reporting. So they have autonomy. This is vital for scrutiny, accountability and compliance. The implementation monitor’s independence will ensure that oversight is transparent and holds government and other agencies with responsibility for implementing the royal commission’s recommendations to account. This is the system we need. This gobsmacking disclosure has occurred. The government acted immediately with a royal commission. The findings have been addressed; the funding has been provided; and now the law, the powers and the independence are being put through this Parliament. The bill provides for the implementation monitor to monitor and assess the adequacy and progress of the royal commission’s recommendations via responsible agencies until implementation is complete—so ‘This is the plan; here are the resources to get the job done’. To assist the implementation monitor, the royal commission explicitly recommended that the monitor be empowered to assess the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations throughout the whole process, not only once responsible agencies have reported on completion; attend meetings of a cross-agency task force

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2575 recommended by the royal commission with responsibility for coordinating and completing implementation of the recommendations; and provide written or oral advice to responsible agencies on measures that the implementation monitor considers would support the adequacy of the implementation of these recommendations and on what is necessary. The implementation monitor also has the power to request regular reports from Victoria Police on its progress in fulfilling its ongoing disclosure obligations to people that the royal commission identified may be affected by Victoria Police’s use of Ms Gobbo as a human source. So this is the necessary architecture. The key recommendations have been made. The inquiry has fulfilled its duty. The monitor has been appointed. The funding is there, provided across all of these different agencies, to bring this together with independent oversight and to try to make sure that between suspicion and evidence we can actually look at what is happening, because this is where the shadow falls. Through the royal commission this is where the light has now been shone, and this is the remedy that the government is putting into place. I recommend the bill to the house. Mr McCURDY (Ovens Valley) (14:59): I am delighted to rise and make a contribution on this bill, the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021. We know the main purpose of the bill is to establish the independent statutory office of the police informants royal commission implementation monitor and provide for the implementation monitor’s functions, powers and duties. We also know that the main provisions include providing for the appointment of an implementation monitor by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of the Attorney-General for up to four years. It is designed to codify the independence of the implementation monitor. So, as we have heard, the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants was established on 3 December 2018 following the publication of the High Court’s decision in which it was revealed former criminal defence barrister Nicola Gobbo, Lawyer X, was a registered police source. This is the first tranche of legislation to give effect to the recommendations of the 30 November 2020 final report of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants, one of which was the need for an independent implementation monitor. As we now know, Sir David Carruthers, former chair of the New Zealand Independent Police Conduct Authority and a former judge in the New Zealand family and youth courts, was appointed as implementation monitor in February this year. Justice Geoffrey Nettle, AC, QC, was appointed as special investigator on 30 June this year, and I want to highlight recommendation 108 of the royal commission involved here:

That the Victorian Government, within three months, appoints an independent Implementation Monitor to monitor the implementation of the Commission’s recommendations until implementation is completed. I think it is important to realise that although this bill has been driven through the informing by Lawyer X, Nicola Gobbo, this bill goes far beyond Nicola Gobbo and the gangland scene of Melbourne. As we know, police informants come in many shapes and sizes and for the most part are police officers doing their job from day to day—that is who most informants are. It is not their work that concerns me; it is who instructed them and what their tasks and purposes are where the monitoring needs to occur. This is where the Andrews Labor government comes under its greatest scrutiny, as far as I am concerned. At best this government is untruthful, but at worst, some say, the Andrews Labor government is corrupt to the core. In terms of police informants, let me give you a real-life example of why we need to have greater transparency and integrity in this area, and I know this from personal experience. Over the last seven years a police informant in Cobram, Detective Marcus Boyd, was approached by a Cobram resident who appeared to be under duress and under pressure from a previous employer who made untruthful allegations against me. Detective Boyd, as the informant, completed a lengthy investigation, interviewing many, many witnesses. Detective Boyd concluded that effectively there was nothing to see here and that the case that he was investigating should be closed, should be terminated, and I have emails to that effect. Detective Boyd received advice from the fraud squad in 2014, who also suggested

BILLS 2576 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 that there would be no case to answer. Now, that is strike two. That is two people, two organisations, saying there is nothing to see here to a police informant. Then Detective Boyd was also advised by crime command in Melbourne that he would really be pushing it to lay charges, and again I have an email trail that demonstrates this. Enter the Andrews Labor government, who were elected in November 2014. Lo and behold, not 12 months later Detective Boyd was instructed to reopen this case and to pursue the investigation. This is a police informant being instructed to reopen a case against a member of the opposition. To be fair, I do not see Detective Boyd as a poor detective; nor do I see him as dishonest or in fact a poor citizen. In fact I think quite the opposite. However, as I have discussed with Detective Boyd recently, we both have our jobs to do, and we all take instructions from above. So for me it begs the question: who instructed Detective Boyd as a police informant to pursue this case through the court system for the best part of seven years—seven years of wasted resources, seven years of an unlawful and unnecessary witch-hunt, all by a police officer who was instructed to pursue this case? ‘Instructed by who?’ is the question that I am determined to get to the bottom of. I said it in front of the Melbourne County Court on 21 April this year: I have got grave concerns for the separation of powers in this state. For those on the other side of the chamber on the government benches who do not understand the separation of powers and the importance that it plays in our Westminster system, I suggest they educate themselves very quickly on the importance the separation of powers has in keeping the legislative, executive and the judicial corridors at arms length from each other. And those arms operate independent of each other. In Victoria under the Andrews Labor government we have not just seen a clouding of these roles, a grey area appearing or a slight crossover, we have seen a massive leap from the three distinct arms of the Westminster system to a very unorthodox, very systematic top-down approach from the executive. And if you care to question my judgement on this path that Victoria is headed down, I will try to help you understand. It was in the County Court in April this year that the case, the trial against me, was thrown out by a judge, Judge Georgiou, and it was supported vigorously by the prosecutor that there was no case to answer. If Detective Boyd as the police informant had been allowed to do his job free from interference, free from instructions, this investigation would have been closed seven years ago. And if you want any confirmation of what I am saying, well, only time will tell. If you are a non-believer of the interference—or some say the corruption—that exists within the executive, then we will find out soon enough, because the prosecutor’s chief witness, Mr Andrew Gilmour, who started this entire case, took an oath on the stand and allegedly perjured himself on four occasions. Now, this is not my version of events of his alleged perjury; this is in the transcripts for the world to see. After frequent alleged perjury, Mr Andrew Gilmour then went on to admit that in fact it was he that falsified an exclusive real estate document—a charge that I was sitting in the dock defending myself against. This was preposterous. At this stage it could be easily demonstrated to the court and to the judge that he had no credibility at all—in fact so much so that Mr Gilmour, who had admitted to an indictable offence in the witness box, was instructed to get legal advice before he could continue. Now, I raise this case not to publicly humiliate Mr Andrew Gilmour, but time will tell if Mr Gilmour is charged with perjury and more importantly charged with falsifying the real estate exclusive document that he admitted to falsifying on multiple occasions while on the stand, once before he was granted leave to seek legal advice and secondly after that legal advice was given. If Mr Gilmour is charged for the said offences, it will give me and others some confidence that the system’s integrity remains intact. If, however, Mr Gilmour is not charged with an offence, one can only be sceptical that our system enjoys the integrity that it claims to have—and only time will tell. If, as I was chased by Detective Boyd under instructions from a higher command, Mr Gilmour is also charged and chased through our court system for an indictable offence that he has admitted to on multiple occasions, only then will I—and others who have followed my case—see if justice will flow in the end. So the bill that we have before us today is a very, very important bill to ensure the integrity of all police informants—not just the backroom deals with criminals and undercover police but all police informants. The roles of monitor and special investigator are roles that will require absolute trust and

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2577 integrity. They will continue to find themselves questioning the course of events and communications between police command, the DPP and witnesses. This is where they will be placed in difficult circumstances, and so these roles must be truly independent appointments. Again, to me this demonstrates that when the informant is instructed to pursue a person or a line of thinking, then either the results will end up skewed or the course of justice may very well be perverted. So the resources that have been used to pursue me for seven long years, and many, many others—clearly a witch-hunt from the beginning—should be freed up to benefit the community, not to persecute opposition members. And it is not just resources of the state. I spent many hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend myself, as have many others in similar circumstances, and the delays that have banked up in the court system are part due to COVID but not helped by the political attacks like those that have occurred against me. So we see that implementation of the key recommendations, such as this implementation monitor that we are discussing here today, is proceeding at a glacial pace. Legislation to deliberate the powers of the special investigator is yet to be introduced, despite the urgency to investigate allegations aired at the royal commission. As the member for Caulfield said so well in his contribution, we will not be opposing this bill, and I look forward to further debate and robust discussion in this place. Mr CARBINES (Ivanhoe) (15:08): I am pleased to make a contribution on the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021, and what a sorry saga it has been. I am very thankful that we have this bill before the Parliament and the actions of both our government and the Attorney-General in implementing many of the significant recommendations from the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants. Let us just go back in the first instance to a couple of elements of the final report of the royal commission, and I quote from that final summary report:

Police are not entitled to pursue suspects at any cost—they must comply with the law and use their powers in a fair and ethical way. Additionally, lawyers cannot freely hand over information about their clients to police—if they do so, they risk breaching their professional obligations and undermining the criminal justice system. When the State prosecutes, convicts and punishes a citizen, it uses considerable powers, including the power to deprive them of their liberty. As a check on those powers, there are well-established rules and principles, such as those now enshrined in the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006— a significant initiative and change to the law implemented by the previous Bracks Labor government— that bit was added by my good self—

… to ensure that as far as possible, criminal investigations and court processes are fair and balanced. These rules and principles apply no matter how serious the crime, and regardless of the accused person’s identity. The report went on to say that these events have put at risk the integrity of the criminal justice system, harmed the reputation of the legal profession and diminished public confidence in Victoria Police, and the commission of course was established to find out how and why these events occurred, to make sure that they never happen again. Amongst the conclusions that have brought us to this place and the legislation that we are dealing with, and I quote again, is:

All people charged with a criminal offence, no matter who they are or what they are accused of, have the right to independent legal advice. They have the right to expect that their lawyer will act ethically and in their best interests, and will not disclose information shared in confidence. They have the right to a fair trial, in which the prosecution must prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt; and they have the right to receive both information on which the prosecution intends to rely, and information that may undermine the prosecution case. A large number of people may have been denied these rights because of the conduct of Ms Gobbo and some current and former Victoria Police officers. What is particularly significant and shocking is that the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants found, and I quote:

BILLS 2578 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

After a rigorous analysis of the evidence, including all relevant submissions, the Commission has concluded that the convictions or findings of guilt of 1,011 people may have been affected by Victoria Police’s use of Ms Gobbo as a human source. This includes people who were deprived of the opportunity to be represented by an independent lawyer acting in their best interests, and those who may have been affected by Ms Gobbo’s conflicts of interest and/or tainted evidence arising from her conduct as a human source. It includes cases where she was acting as the person’s lawyer, and cases where she was not; for example, where the person was a co-accused of one of her clients. So these are really significant findings in the royal commission’s report. And of course what brings us to this point today with the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill is the work that we need to do now. Through the establishment of the royal commission back in December 2018 to independently inquire into those matters there was not only the uncovering of those issues that I have raised but the 111 recommendations that have been made. One of them was for the implementation monitor, which brings us to the administrative and legal mechanism, the legislative mechanism, that we are debating today. The bill will establish the functions of the implementation monitor, the necessary powers to perform those functions under the bill and the reporting framework for the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations, including annual reporting by the monitor both to the Attorney- General and to the Parliament via the Attorney-General. Recommendation 109 of the final report requires the government in establishing the monitor to provide appropriate secretarial support and services to assist in the implementation of the commission’s findings, which is also a very significant amount of work that will need to be done. I think what we have also seen through the royal commission’s findings and the work that it has done is that it has had to deal with, whether it was by Victoria Police or other agencies, the use of taxpayers money—multimillion dollars of taxpayers money—to obfuscate, to not be forthcoming, to not be clear and transparent and to not meet their accountabilities to the Victorian public in the way in which they have sought to challenge a lot of the work and the inquisitorial nature of the work of the royal commission, and that was also evidenced and acknowledged in the report. Can I also just touch on the fact that a former constituent of mine and former Premier of Victoria, the Honourable John Cain, who was also a former Attorney-General of this Parliament, regularly attended the public hearings of this royal commission when it first began. He passed away before the work had been concluded, but he was a very regular attendee at those public hearings in the gallery because he was for a lifetime someone of great integrity in public office and public institutions. And as a lawyer himself, he held to account public administration and organisations in the community. Certainly I think the integrity and the importance and the way the issues were dealt with by the royal commission pricked his conscience, and it was no surprise that he also regularly made observations and was engaged by people in media and others who wanted to seek his views on the work of the commission as it rolled out and some of the really explosive findings that came from that royal commission. Can I say also that a number of the pieces of work that we are doing here will provide opportunities so that the implementation monitor can request reports from Victoria Police, request reports from the special investigator on progress to establish operations and the outcomes of those investigations and request reports from the Chief Commissioner of Police. There are also a range of other elements. People would be aware that an implementation monitor has been appointed and announced; that is Sir David Carruthers. He was announced back in February when he was appointed to this role. There is very significant history on his work as a judge of New Zealand’s Family Court and also as the chair of the New Zealand Parole Board in the past as well as their Independent Police Conduct Authority. What all this comes back to ultimately in the work that we now need to do, which is outlined here, is that it is really important that this bill is expedited, that it gives the powers to the implementation monitor to work through and hold accountable the recommendations of the royal commission and also that it makes it very clear that the ongoing reporting can demonstrate an accountability to public agencies of the work that they are required to do. Where there are issues or where there is more

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2579 resourcing required, that can come before the Parliament, and the progress and implementation recommendations can also be followed through here in our Parliament. The final report of the royal commission emphasised the need for all stakeholders to work together to achieve purposeful implementation. That might sound nice, but these responsibilities ultimately need to have the full force of legislation and the law of the land, and that is what we are going to do here with this legislation. I just want to also draw, lastly, attention to some further commentary that came in the report from Commissioner McMurdo when she said, in reference to former police commissioner Mr Ashton, that Mr Ashton’s omitting to investigate the propriety of police use of Ms Gobbo while at the Office of Police Integrity was a lost opportunity and that he should have known that this inherently problematic situation warranted urgent legal advice as to its propriety and that it may very well raise issues requiring the OPI’s investigation and oversight. There are really significant issues that have led not only to that royal commission but to justice being unpicked and not being served appropriately. The High Court labelled the conduct of Victoria Police as reprehensible in relation to much of what had gone on in relation to the management of police informants. It has undermined public confidence in Victoria Police and the law. These things go to culture, not just at the top but right through an organisation. Culture starts at the top, and there needs to be a heck of a lot more work done to improve the culture of organisations like those that have been excoriated in the royal commission’s findings. This legislation goes a long way to restoring justice, fairness, transparency and accountability in public agencies that have hidden, behind the use of public funds, their bad behaviour. I commend this bill to the house. Mr KENNEDY (Hawthorn) (15:18): I am pleased to contribute to the debate on the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021. My contention will be that the bill, in implementing a key recommendation of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants, ensures that independence lies at the heart of the government’s response to the royal commission’s recommendations. The government has accepted the royal commission’s recommendations, and its detailed response, set out in the bill, is sufficiently thorough to give the community renewed confidence in Victoria’s criminal justice system. Before going any further could I just make a couple of remarks in regard to some previous speeches. The member for Broadmeadows I think very calmly—and what we want in this house, I believe, is calm—presented background material and the lead-up to where we are today in this situation, and I commend his speech for that. The opposition once again was falling back on things like, ‘The government is untruthful’—oh, yes; not substantiated, but there it is, throw it in. I would like to say that I also noted the amendment from the member for Caulfield, who is with us in the house at the moment. Whilst I choose to make no comment on the actual details of that, may I just add a note of caution. I think it would be very disappointing if at the forthcoming election, which the opposition is starting to have a bit of interest in—I am having a bit of interest in it myself, actually— we have these little bits and pieces to go et cetera. Can I just ask, please, that it not be about law and order—it was a disaster. My colleague, the previous member for Hawthorn, spent a lot of time and energy on law and order. In Hawthorn it was a disaster. Trying to convince people of the dangers of walking down Glenferrie Road or Burke Road and so on was a misuse of the victims of crime, and trotting them out in every shop in Hawthorn West, quite close to where I live, even, was a disaster. So all I am saying is just a note of caution, a bit of help, take it or leave it—do not let this become about law and order. We really want from the opposition something a bit more substantial, something that respects the people and does not just get caught up in that emotional claptrap. I was just nervous when I saw the amendment that we were not going to head that way. I would like to think that we will all agree on something a bit different, a bit creative and a bit more substantive than the old law and order chestnut that keeps being trotted out.

BILLS 2580 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Mr Southwick: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, I was giving the member a fair bit of wiggle room in terms of where he was heading with that remark, but can I ask you to bring him back to the bill. The amendment that is being proposed is purely in relation to delivering a time frame for the implementation monitor. It has got nothing to do with our law and order policy. It is actually reporting on the government’s agenda, so I ask you to bring him back to the bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Hawthorn had strayed somewhat from the bill before the house. I ask him to come back to the bill. Mr KENNEDY: I will happily come back to the bill, although I believe they are all related. More of that anon. Let us go to the details of the bill, which the member for Caulfield is looking forward to—so here we go. As a vital part of the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations the government has determined to provide a robust structure, okay—not a political one, a robust structure—for independent monitoring and reporting of the recommendations. To ensure independence the bill establishes a statutory office of the police informants royal commission implementation monitor. The monitor is to be appointed by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of the Attorney-General for a term of no longer than four years. As a qualification for appointment as the monitor the bill requires that the incumbent possesses a strong understanding of multi-agency environments and knowledge of or experience in the subject matter of the royal commission’s recommendations. Importantly, the bill establishes the authority and the independence of the monitor. Conforming with present practice in our courts and tribunals, the bill specifies that the monitor is not under the direction of any person during the performance of and exercise of their functions, powers and duties, particularly including the content of their reporting. An earlier speaker was making this point—and it is a valid one—to always be mindful of the separation of powers. I think everyone agrees with that, and measures like this are in that vein, I believe. The independence of the monitor ensures transparency as to the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations and ensures government and other agencies responsible for implementing the royal commission’s recommendations are held to account. So why are we doing this? The bill was established by the government after it was revealed by a 2018 High Court decision that former criminal barrister Nicola Gobbo was a registered Victoria Police human source. The final report of the royal commission delivered to the government on 20 November contained 11 recommendations, 54 of which are directed to the government. The government released a detailed response to the royal commission’s recommendations in May 2021, reiterating its commitment to implementing the commission’s recommendations. The role of the monitor is to assess and report on the progress of implementation of royal commission recommendations. It was recommended by the royal commission that the monitor be appointed within three months of its final report, and it followed that the government appointed Sir David Carruthers, eminently qualified for the position of monitor, to fulfil the role in February 2021. To give effect to that appointment the bill establishes the supporting administrative arrangements for the monitor by a small secretariat within the Department of Justice and Community Safety. As has been said by one of my colleagues, the government has invested $2.03 million in establishing the office of the implementation monitor and to ensure the independent and adequate monitoring of the royal commission’s recommendations. So just to revise what the objectives are, the intention is to support the monitor when performing the monitoring functions of that office. It has two principal roles. The first is to monitor and assess the adequacy and progress of the implementation of all the royal commission’s recommendations and to report to the Attorney-General as to the adequacy and the progress of the recommendations. Until implementation is complete it is to be the role of the monitor to assess the adequacy and progress of the recommendations by the responsible agencies.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2581

To assist this function the royal commission made explicit recommendations for the monitor to be empowered to assess the implementation of the recommendations through the implementation period; to attend meetings of the implementation task force, the cross-agency body recommended by the royal commission; to provide written or oral advice to the various agencies responsible for implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations; and to seek that Victoria Police provide regular reports as to its progress in fulfilling the obligatory disclosure obligations to people identified by the royal commission as potentially impacted by Victoria Police use of Ms Gobbo as a human source. As a consequence of the royal commission’s recommendations a Special Investigator Bill 2021 will, it is anticipated, be introduced later this year. The special investigator will have functions arising from the royal commission. The monitor will be empowered to request reports from the special investigator as to the establishment of the special investigator’s operations. There are a number of obligations of the monitor. The powers have been clearly set out in this. The precise membership of who is doing what in the process is well set out in the bill. So the community will feel assured that the monitor is adequately empowered, that the implementation of the royal commission recommendations is being independently monitored and that the Victorian government and the lead agencies are being held to account in ensuring our criminal justice system operates soundly. I commend the bill to the house. Sitting suspended 3.30 pm until 4.03 pm. Dr READ (Brunswick) (16:03): I am speaking today on the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021, which the Greens obviously support. I might also add it is a shame that more stringent police oversight was not already in place prior to the sorry tale that led to this royal commission. The bill creates an independent implementation monitor to assess and report on the status and adequacy of the implementation of the recommendations of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants. The creation of this independent monitor was itself a recommendation of the royal commission, and the government has already appointed Sir David Carruthers to the role. I am not going to dwell on most of the royal commission’s findings and recommendations. We all know the shameful story by now, and most of the royal commission’s recommendations are fairly straightforward. But what I am going to touch on are the issues that a royal commission cannot really go into in their carefully restricted terms of reference—that is, the underlying political and government culture and environment that enables these scandals to occur. Victoria Police, an organisation established in 1853, is not unique in having problematic and deep-rooted cultural problems that fall well short of contemporary standards of conduct. So while this royal commission points the finger squarely at Victoria Police, the Greens hold that it is also successive Victorian governments, particularly the current Labor government, who have at best been apathetic towards and more likely directly related to this culture of denial, deceit and cover-up that has been prominent in recent politics in Victoria. Royal commissions generally emerge from either unforeseen disasters or political failures and a weakness of government, and this government is starting to rack up the latter kind. The casino is the obvious example, and the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System would not have occurred if mental health had been adequately funded and managed in the first place. We all know what a good integrity system looks like: it is strongly led, well resourced, independent and transparent, and it reports regularly. In fact these were the words used to describe the implementation monitor outlined in this bill. So the question has to be asked: why has it taken until 2021 for such characteristics to apply to the oversight of police conduct? Why do we need a royal commission before we decide to act? For a government that constantly describes itself as getting on with the job, why does it rely on retrospective royal commissions to clean up a mess? The government may argue that this no longer matters given that we have had a royal commission, but to me it does matter. It matters because I have not been able to say to the people who approach my office for assistance making a complaint against police that regardless of their issue they can at least be confident

BILLS 2582 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 in the independence and fairness of the process, and it matters because the most vulnerable people, who have historically been mistreated by the law—Aboriginal people—continue to be disproportionately in contact with law enforcement and the criminal justice system and tragically continue to die in police cells and prisons in Victoria. Yet even 30 years after a Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody a fair system for investigating cases of police misconduct has not been a government priority. And I might add that part of oversight of police misconduct involves adequate funding of community legal services and particularly, in this case, the Victorian Aboriginal Legal Service, which requires an increase in its funding right now. Police standards are essential to maintain community trust, and this has never been more the case than during the current pandemic, when we are relying on not only the trust in our health institutions but the political leadership to communicate public health directions and police on the ground to enforce them. The Greens have consistently pushed for a parliamentary integrity officer, not because it is particularly nice for us as individual MPs to have an agency looking over our shoulder but because we recognise that in the long-term the work we do as MPs and the outcomes we achieve will all be improved by holding ourselves to higher standards. Likewise we do not expect individual police to love the idea of having powerful independent oversight and greater transparency, but if they genuinely believe in high performance and if their contrition and apology for the behaviour exposed in the royal commission is genuine, then I hope to see this reflected in their support of a more powerful integrity framework to investigate all police misconduct and corruption. At the same time the Victorian government, notably the Premier, cannot continue to block greater transparency and integrity at every turn by playing favourites and weakly appeasing the wishes of the most powerful organisations if it suits his political fortunes. It is not a great look. And what is worse is that our standing integrity agencies—IBAC, the Auditor-General’s office and the Victorian Ombudsman—continue to be gaslighted by the government when they request the most meagre of additional resources. This is something that is truly wrong when a government spends more money on legal representation to shield itself from inquiries and royal commissions than it does on providing additional resources to anti- corruption agencies. Therefore we call on the government not just to limit itself to this implementation monitor bill in response to a royal commission but to proactively avoid the next royal commission by urgently changing the bail laws to reduce pre-trial Indigenous imprisonment and deaths in custody—and that has only got worse since the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, especially under this government—and to implement the UN’s Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. We also call on the government to end corrupt planning decisions and ban developers from political donations, as well as those from gambling and the hotels industry, and to allow citizens to view body-worn camera footage of police and to use this as evidence in civil trials. We call on the government to proactively investigate the integrity of forensic evidence used in criminal trials rather than pretend the problem has gone away until there is a miscarriage of justice, to publish ministerial diaries and introduce revolving door laws to protect politics from lobbyist sleaze, to set up an independent funding mechanism for our outstanding integrity agencies, to widen the Royal Commission into the Casino Operator and Licence to examine exactly how the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation and the government have allowed an astounding level of illegality to occur for decades and to move to introduce an independent parliamentary integrity officer to uphold basic standards for MPs equivalent to other organisations. If the government supports this implementation monitor today, then it no longer has an excuse not to roll out these similar integrity reforms, because while this government has done a lot of things right, there is a gaping hole in Victoria’s police oversight and anti-corruption mechanisms. Mr FOWLES (Burwood) (16:10): Either time flies when you are having fun or the member for Brunswick did not speak for 10 minutes perhaps. Right. Well, there it is. I think I was going off my 10-minute body clock.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2583

It is my pleasure to rise to make a contribution around the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021. Royal commission implementation monitors were not, I confess, a concept I was familiar with prior to my election to this place, but their work is very important. Their work is very, very important—and royal commissions are pretty fond of recommending that there be implementation monitors these days, too—because they provide that level of quasi royal commission or royal commission-like independence and oversight in implementing the recommendations so that it does not fall just to government. Obviously it is a key function of government, but when a government accepts a bunch of recommendations, or particularly when independent statutory authorities accept recommendations, we know that there is someone monitoring that those recommendations are being implemented correctly. This bill is all about making sure that we have the right implementation monitor, that we have an appropriately resourced implementation monitor and that the very, very important findings of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants are given full effect. But before I get into the detail of the bill I do want to just pick up on what I thought was an extraordinary intervention from the member for Ovens Valley earlier in this debate. He quite clearly implied that somehow the executive—he was pointing his finger at the government—had some hand in his prosecution. He characterised the executive as going after the opposition, and I thought that was an extraordinary intervention. I thought it was a dangerous intervention. He used parliamentary privilege to go after a bunch of people who had given statements against him in the course of the criminal charges that were laid against him—and I absolutely hasten to add that he has been acquitted or in fact was not committed to stand trial—on those matters. But it was an extraordinary accusation to make to suggest that the executive somehow had a hand in directing police to continue to investigate the matter with which he was ultimately charged. That is a big allegation in any forum. It is a big allegation in this forum, and I am surprised that he would make that allegation in that way and under, frankly, the thinnest of pretences in speaking on this bill, which frankly has nothing to do with allegedly criminal conduct of real estate agents. It just has nothing to do with it at all. He has used that opportunity to impugn members of this government. It is probably fair to say after the matters pertaining to Nicola Gobbo— Ms Britnell: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I just bring to your attention that this is straying from the actual bill, and I ask you to bring the member back to the actual bill. Ms Spence: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, the member is responding to issues that were raised in debate on this bill. He is simply responding to matters that have already been raised, so I ask that you rule the point of order out of order. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Dimopoulos): The minister makes a good point. I do not uphold the point of order, given it was raised in the debate. But I do encourage the member to get more directly to the bill at some point soon. Mr FOWLES: Thank you, Acting Speaker. Of course the member for Ovens Valley spent the entirety of his contribution on this bill talking about the criminal matters laid against him, those who had laid them, whether the executive was involved and whether there was interference in the police prosecution and naming individuals who he said perjured themselves. So, you know, it is a bit precious frankly for others to suggest that somehow I am straying beyond the purview of this debate, given the unbelievable liberties he took with this debate. What I would say in concluding my comments around this portion of the debate is that there might have been a time when I would have said that this is just simply beyond comprehension—and then the Nicola Gobbo matters came up and we went, ‘Well, some of the things that we might consider absolutely extraordinary have in fact occurred in the administration of justice in the state of Victoria’. So whilst I consider it extraordinarily unlikely, I do not consider it beyond possibility. But if he has got an allegation to make, he should make it and he should refer the matter to IBAC. He should not be using the privileges of this place to slam the executive and somehow accuse members of this government of interfering personally and directly with his prosecution. That is an extraordinary accusation for him to make. If he is serious about it, if he actually

BILLS 2584 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 believes what he is saying—and who knows whether he does or not—he should refer it to IBAC. He should make good on his words in this place and refer those matters to the appropriate and independent authorities, rather than just coming into this place and slamming various witnesses to his matter and the government on the way through. However, it is a pleasure, can I say, to follow the member for Hawthorn on any contribution in this place. There are not many people who can legitimately and credibly use terms like ‘claptrap’. I think the member for Hawthorn reels that one out quite a bit, and it is an absolute beauty. He refers to coming to matters ‘anon’. He is undoubtably a classicist. He gives a wonderful contribution, as he did today in encouraging his predecessor, John Pesutto, to not run a specious and dishonest campaign on African gangs terrorising the good folk of Hawthorn when it comes to the next election campaign. This bill is actually not about real estate matters in the north of Victoria or even about the African gangs terrorising those in Burke Road, Camberwell. In fact the bill is about a very important set of reforms that came out of this Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants. And, yes, it is similar to other implementation monitors, but this one is particularly important because Victoria Police’s conduct in relation to using Nicola Gobbo as a human informant, a human source, against her own clients goes to the very, very heart of the fair administration of justice in this state. It struck right at the heart. It was an extraordinary thing that anyone inside any arm of government, independent or otherwise, could think that it was okay for a criminal barrister to be informing against her own clients. It just breached every single ethical obligation that a lawyer has and it breached, we would say, a whole bunch of obligations that the other agencies involved had. Of course it brought about this royal commission and a world of pain in terms of a bunch of convictions which might now be set aside because of this grossly unethical conduct and the reliance on somebody who should never have been relied upon. I am very pleased that we have made an appointment for the implementation monitor, someone who will take up that very important statutory role upon the promulgation of this bill. Sir David Carruthers is a very senior New Zealand jurist who has been involved, particularly when he became chair of the New Zealand Independent Police Conduct Authority, in matters pertaining to police conduct—police misconduct in this case—and in relation to ensuring the integrity, the robustness, the transparency and the accountability of the criminal justice system. I am very pleased that the government has indeed made that appointment. We have not just made the appointment though; we have backed it up with money. As part of a funding package totalling $87.9 million, which was in response to this royal commission and implementing its findings, there is a carve-out of a bit over $2 million to establish the office of the implementation monitor. So if you are going to have a royal commission, if you are going to do all of that—spend all that money, do all of the investigative work and determine what has actually gone on—you had better be ready to deal with the consequences. This government is ready and stands ready and has been taking the necessary action to give full effect to those recommendations. By establishing a robust governance structure and working closely with all agencies, we are just going to ensure that those shortfalls that were uncovered by this royal commission are in fact addressed. You address it in part—because the implementation monitor is not the whole solution—by making sure the implementation monitor has all the necessary and reasonable powers he needs and by supporting all the agencies to cooperate and assist the implementation monitor in his very important responsibilities. It was an unfortunate chapter in Victoria’s history, but we turn a page now and move forward as we implement these very important recommendations. Mr EDBROOKE (Frankston) (16:20): It is an absolute pleasure to rise this afternoon and speak on the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021, and it is always great to follow the member for Burwood as well. He gives others credit where credit is due, but he is, I would say—would modest be the word I would be saying? He is a modest chap, and he does speak well. He is very articulate and I think he does very well on his feet.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2585

This Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill will establish an independent statutory office of the police informants royal commission implementation monitor. The bill provides the implementation monitor with the appropriate power to assess and report on the progress and adequacy of the implementation of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants recommendations until implementation is complete. The establishment of an implementation monitor is a key recommendation from the royal commission. What it is really about is that the government is showing its commitment to a collaborative implementation with all stakeholders to ensure that the commission’s objectives are indeed met and the circumstances that gave rise to some very complicated factors and a very complicated situation—in essence, when you boil it down, some very simple ethics and fences and lines were crossed—can never happen again. But time and time again, whether it is sitting in this house or in my office listening to those on their feet, I hear the opposition, and today is just another example of how befuddled they are about this. They are, if you can call them a stakeholder, the only stakeholder that I do not think understands what this bill is doing, and today’s speech by the Shadow Minister for Police, the member for Caulfield, absolutely showed that. Time and time again we find ourselves on this side of the house getting to our feet and having to correct hopefully innocent mistakes in reasoned amendments and amendments put forward. I will address a couple of these. I hope members of the opposition are actually listening to this so we can endeavour, I guess, to educate them as to what is actually happening with this bill, why it was written as it is written, what those outcomes and goals that we are setting are and how we are going to achieve them. The member for Caulfield circulated amendments in relation to the Attorney-General’s requirement to report to Parliament on the progress of the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. He suggested that the statutory time frames would not be met. They are the time frames that are detailed in the bill for the monitor to report to the Attorney-General or report to Parliament. To clarify this, the bill requires the implementation monitor to report to the Attorney- General annually or more frequently as required. Under the bill the implementation monitor must give a copy of their implementation report to the Attorney-General by 30 September each year and the Attorney-General must table a progress report by 30 November each year or within 60 days after receiving an implementation report—fairly standard, you would think. That implementation monitor is expected to provide his first report to the Attorney-General on the adequacy and progress of the implementation by 30 September this year—well before next year’s election—and that will allow the Attorney to report to Parliament in November this year, again well before next year’s election. It is anticipated by all that read the bill that these reporting requirements are satisfactory and that the goal will be fulfilled. This should not hold the bill up from passing this Parliament, because that amendment is totally wrong and anyone voting for it is voting in error. In fact it seems almost arbitrary at times when we are in this house listening to those mistakes, but there is a litany of errors that have come out in that speech today from the shadow minister. Another one concerns the implementation task force. The shadow minister raised some questions in relation to the delivery of recommendation 107 of the royal commission’s final report. It requires the Victorian government within three months—that is, by the end of February 2021—to establish an implementation task force chaired by a senior executive of the Department of Justice and Community Safety with responsibility for coordinating and completing implementation of the commission’s recommendations. Now, the shadow minister queried whether this recommendation had been implemented and whether it occurred within the indicative three-month time frame. I can confirm and clarify for the shadow minister and opposition members that the implementation task force met for the first time in December 2020, less than a month after the commission delivered its final report. So here we are again with the opposition going out on a limb, writing their own story, when these boxes have already been ticked, these goals have already been met. The implementation task force in fact meets every two months or as required under its terms of reference. All Victorian agencies with a responsibility for implementation are members of the task force, as are the implementation monitor and the special

BILLS 2586 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 investigator. The Secretary to the Department of Justice and Community Safety chairs the implementation task force as well. Another error concerns the special investigator or special prosecutor, as the shadow minister said, which in itself is a fabricated term—made up; it is not even in the legislation before the house. The shadow minister, the member for Caulfield, queried the appointment of a special prosecutor and questioned why the government had not appointed someone to this position. I wish to clarify that the royal commission did not recommend the appointment of a special prosecutor at all. The royal commission recommended the establishment of a special investigator and that legislation supporting the establishment of the special investigator be developed within 12 months of the final report. The development of that legislation is on track for introduction to Parliament shortly. Indeed ahead of this legislation being finalised the government has appointed former High Court Justice Geoffrey Nettle, AC, QC, as the special investigator, and he started in the role on 19 July 2021. I will just clarify again: that is Geoffrey Nettle, AC, QC, as the special investigator, not the special prosecutor. Now, there are better legal minds than mine in this house at the moment, but I will say that there is a huge leap between an investigator and a prosecutor. An investigator investigates, finds facts, finds a foundation of evidence, and usually that has got to do with proving someone’s guilt or someone’s innocence. A prosecutor does a totally different job—a totally different job—and today we have really pared back to the bone the misunderstanding of this legislation by the opposition. It is not the first time it has happened and I am sure it will not be the last, but all I ask is that members of the opposition actually read the legislation. They should not just read the newspaper articles and let the media do the hard work for them. Read the legislation. If you do not understand it, ask some questions. We have got great people in our departments who are more than willing to put in hours and hours and hours of time to help people understand what is going on. I understand that not everyone in Parliament is a lawyer. I understand that there are people from all walks of life in Parliament, but we do have that facility available, and if you get really hard up there is always Google as well. So Justice Nettle is undertaking that crucial preparatory work to progress investigation as soon as legislation to establish the special investigator passes Parliament. As recommended by the royal commission, the special investigator will undertake criminal investigations into whether there is sufficient evidence to establish the commission of a criminal offence or offences connected with Victoria Police’s use of Ms Nicola Gobbo as a human source. The member for Burwood spoke a little about that very complex case, but as I said, at the heart of it there are some very simple ethical boundaries that were crossed there. The commission did not of course recommend that a special prosecutor be appointed but rather that special investigator we have spoken about. An investigator will be responsible for preparing briefs of evidence, and they would be handed to the Director of Public Prosecutions to determine whether to prosecute in accordance with her existing prosecutorial functions. So I hope that has cleared up some of this very complex legislation today—but only very complex if you did not bother reading it, only very complex if you did not bother asking questions, only very complex if you did not bother talking to our great people who work for us in the department or in the minister’s office. It is actually not that hard—and we have got Google as well. If you do not understand terms, there is always the online dictionary. The difference between a prosecutor and an investigator is very, very important in this legislation, and it is either an innocent mistake or very misleading to actually mix those two up in the sense of this debate today. This government has shown its commitment with progressive policy and funding to actually make sure this does not happen again, and I commend this bill to the house. Mr McGHIE (Melton) (16:30): I rise today to contribute to the debate on the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021. Firstly I would like to acknowledge the contributions before me, in particular, as he leaves, the member for Burwood—his contribution was fantastic—and also the member for Frankston. I appreciate their contributions.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2587

On 3 December 2018, following the publication of the High Court’s decision, which revealed a former criminal defence barrister, Ms Nicola Gobbo, was a registered Victoria Police human source, the government announced the establishment of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants to independently inquire into matters to go to the heart of Victoria’s criminal justice system over more than two decades. This royal commission delivered its final report to the Victorian government on 30 November 2020. The report contained 111 recommendations, of which 54 were directed to the government. Later, in May this year, the government released a detailed response to the royal commission’s final report and confirmed its commitment to implementing the commission’s recommendations. It has been recommended by the royal commission that a robust governance structure with independent monitoring and reporting should be in place to ensure effective and transparent implementation. This is an important recommendation to ensure a robust governance structure. This will deliver confidence back to the Victorian community about how police informants will be handled into the future. Following the recommendation that the government appoint an implementation monitor within three months of its final report, the government appointed Sir David Carruthers to this role in February this year. Sir David is an eminent member of the legal community. He was appointed as a judge of New Zealand’s Family Court and the Youth Court in Wellington in 1985 and then as the Chief District Court Judge in 2001. In 2005 Sir David was appointed chair of the New Zealand Parole Board and in 2012 became chair of the New Zealand Independent Police Conduct Authority, so I think he knows something about this business. He was made a distinguished companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit in 2005 and was knighted in 2009 for his service to the district courts, so he is a most credible person to be appointed to this role. This bill provides for the Governor in Council, on the recommendation of the Attorney-General, to appoint a person as the police informants royal commission implementation monitor. Following the passage of the bill he will be formally appointed into the new statutory position. Having such an eminent member of the legal community is a great asset for Victoria. His experience in the New Zealand legal system also ensures an independent and respected overview of the implementation monitor. An implementation monitor holds office for the term specified by the Governor in Council, which under the bill cannot exceed four years. The monitor can also be reappointed for further terms of up to four years. This bill seeks to establish the statutory office of the police informants royal commission implementation monitor. This monitor will have reasonable and necessary powers to fulfil their role. The Andrews Labor government has invested $2.03 million to establish this office of the implementation monitor, and this will ensure the progress and implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. This bill will establish the functions of the implementation monitor. It will confer on the implementation monitor the necessary powers to perform their functions under the bill. It will establish the reporting framework for the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations, including annual reporting by the implementation monitor to the Attorney-General and by the Attorney-General to Parliament. The bill will acquit recommendation 109 of the royal commission’s final report, and the implementation monitor, with the support of a small secretariat located within the Department of Justice and Community Safety, will have powers to fulfil their role to assess the implementation of the commission’s recommendations throughout the implementation process, not only once responsibility agencies have reported on the completion of the implementation. It will access implementation task force documents and attend meetings of the implementation task force. It will indicate to responsible agencies the extent to which their implementation of the commission’s recommendations is considered adequate and will request regular reports from Victoria Police on its progress in fulfilling its ongoing disclosure obligations to potentially affected persons identified by the commission. It will also request reports from the special investigator on progress to establish their operations and the outcomes of their investigations, and it will also request reports from the chief commissioner of Victoria Police on the progress and outcomes of any disciplinary proceedings arising from the special investigator’s disciplinary investigations.

BILLS 2588 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

The final report of the royal commission emphasises the need for all stakeholders to work together to achieve a purposeful implementation. The implementation monitor will take the lead role in oversighting the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations and ensuring the acquittal of recommendations is outcomes focused. Agencies that will be subject to the implementation monitor’s powers have acknowledged the important role in ensuring the royal commission’s recommendations are delivered in a timely manner that is consistent with the royal commission’s outcomes focus. The government is committed to a collaborative implementation with all stakeholders to ensure the commission’s objectives are met and the circumstances that gave rise to the royal commission can never happen again—and I do not think there is any Victorian that would like to see that ever happen again. Back on 7 May 2021 the Attorney-General released the government’s response to the final report of the royal commission alongside an implementation plan and also with some funding of $87.9 million. The plan focuses on actions to implement the royal commission’s 54 recommendations directed to the government. It also outlines the principles-based framework agreed to by all other bodies responsible for the implementation of the remaining 57 recommendations. This almost $88 million in funding will go to the Department of Justice and Community Safety, the Office of Public Prosecutions, Victoria Legal Aid, the Victorian Legal Services Board and commissioner, Victoria Police, the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission and the courts to support implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. As part of this funding package a total of $2.03 million has been committed to establish the office of the implementation monitor. A robust governance structure has also been established, and the government is working closely with all the agencies to implement those responsibilities. This legislation provides the implementation monitor with all the necessary and reasonable powers required to fulfil their role and to support all the agencies with responsibilities for implementation to do so fully. The following agencies will be subject to the implementation monitor’s powers under the bill: the Department of Justice and Community Safety, the Department of Premier and Cabinet, Victoria Police, the Office of Public Prosecutions, the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission, the Public Interest Monitor, the Victorian legal services commissioner, the Law Institute of Victoria, the Victorian Bar Incorporated and the Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office. These agencies have recommendations directed towards them for implementation and are all members of the cross-agency implementation task force, which has been established as recommended by the royal commission. Under the bill the Attorney-General can also recommend to the Governor in Council that further agencies be oversighted by the implementation monitor. The Attorney-General is permitted under the bill to request that the implementation monitor provide written or oral advice on any issue relating to the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. The ability to request advice does not permit the Attorney-General to direct or influence the implementation monitor in the exercise of their functions or powers. Rather it provides an opportunity for the Attorney-General to seek timely advice from the implementation monitor so that implementation issues can be addressed as expeditiously as possible. This is consistent with the family violence reform implementation monitor, who is also required to respond to requests by the minister for advice. The bill requires an implementation monitor to consider a broad range of factors and be informed by advice from and engagement with responsible agencies when performing their functions. The bill requires the implementation monitor to consider the following factors, including when preparing an implementation report: the recommendations made by the royal commission; advice and reports provided by responsible agencies on implementation progress, including any impediments to implementation and whether any measures have been taken to overcome those impediments; whether genuine attempts have been made to comply with the royal commission’s time frames for implementation; and whether there are any interdependencies or external processes which may affect the responsible agency’s timely implementation of the recommendations.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2589

This is an important bill for Victoria, and it strikes back in gaining the confidence of our community members—and that is why it is so important. I want to thank the Premier for his leadership on this particular issue. I also want to extend my thanks to the Attorney-General and her predecessor and their teams for the effort they have put in, and I commend this bill to the house. Ms GREEN (Yan Yean) (16:40): Thank you to the member for Melton for taking my spot and speaking for me to allow me to continue an important meeting I was having with parents from the Hurstbridge Preschool. I have not been in the chamber for the debate, but I have been following it on live stream—and it is always interesting to reflect on what others have said before you in the debate. But I think what we come down to is that this is a government that does not shirk away from problems, and the fact is that we called a royal commission into this on 3 December 2018. I want to commend the Premier for doing that and the member for Altona, the previous Attorney-General, who has just achieved so much in her short tenure and indeed in whatever role she has taken, and now ably the carriage of this work and indeed the chief law office is being occupied by Jaclyn Symes in the other place. We have the privilege of sharing an electorate—she is in the upper house—that covers Yan Yean, and her passion for all matters legal is longstanding and well known in her having worked for the previous Attorney-General, the first Attorney-General that I served under, Rob Hulls, who still has an amazing interest in the law and in alternative justice. The fact is we faced up, we fronted it and we said—and this was very shortly after the last election— that there was a need to really go and have a look at what had been occurring around this human source that we now know was the solicitor Nicola Gobbo. The commission’s extensive and detailed inquiry uncovered significant historical shortfalls in the criminal justice system and made a total of 111 recommendations to address these deficits and give the community confidence in the system going forward. I think for me and for my community it was really the shaking of confidence that people had, and particularly in Victoria Police. Victoria Police has been probably one of the best regarded police services in this country, and so it really did shake people’s confidence—and that was very unfair to the large majority of police members. A previous police commissioner described parts of my electorate in Mernda and Doreen as ‘cop land’ in that there are so many serving members of Victoria Police that live in Mernda and Doreen and other parts of my electorate. I have met many of them through football clubs and schools, and they are great citizens of the community in addition to what they do for their work along with many other first responders that reside in the Yan Yean electorate. So I think it was incredibly difficult, especially for those newer Victoria Police members who then might be saddled with the legacy of what had occurred, which the royal commission established. I think probably in my early career in the public service and even as I joined the Parliament here in 2002 there had been this idea that, you know, ‘If you’ve got a problem, call a royal commission, get a report, then shelve it’. And when you look at the many reports into aged care at a federal level, that is what they do and continue to do. But the first very real experience that I had with a royal commission and its implementation was following the horrific events of February 2009, Black Saturday. As the member for Melton said, it was crucially important with something that far-reaching to have an implementation monitor. So we have an implementation monitor for the findings of the Black Saturday royal commission, we have an implementation monitor for the family violence royal commission, and that is what you do—you take an issue, you grasp the nettle, you investigate it, you take seriously the recommendations, and then you take seriously their implementation. That is what this bill before the house is—it is about establishing an implementation monitor. We have an extremely well-respected jurist in Sir David Carruthers from across the ditch, from New Zealand, who was appointed to the position in February. He is an eminent member of the legal community, and he was appointed as a judge of New Zealand’s Family Court and the Youth Court in Wellington in 1985 and then the chief district court judge in 2001. In 2001 Sir David was appointed chair of the New Zealand Parole Board and in 2012 became the chair of the New Zealand independent police conduct authority.

BILLS 2590 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

So I think that, with Sir David’s background, the community can be very well assured that his appointment has been taken very seriously, and this bill gives effect to that. I must say that I am disappointed that this has been a very one-sided debate. The member for Caulfield introduced and spoke on behalf of the opposition and said that they would not be opposing this bill, and then the only other speaker from the opposition has been the member for Ovens Valley. I did want to make a comment about the member for Ovens Valley—and I will just pick up my iPad that just fell onto the seat in front. It has been well known that the member for Ovens Valley had a very difficult legal matter that hung over his head for some time in this place, and I have a great deal of sympathy for him and his family. It must have been very, very difficult. But if I had been in the chamber, I think I would have raised a point of order, because his contribution really should have been by way of a personal explanation or a matter for grievance, because he really did not go to the heart of this bill at all, in any way, shape or form, and he was raising matters that were just deeply personal about his own case. He also made allegations that I think were completely fallacious and implied that there had been some witch-hunt by people unknown but by implication may be members of the Andrews Labor government. I just absolutely decry that, and it should not have been a matter that was raised in the context of this bill. It is totally irrelevant to that, and I can see absolutely no reason why anyone in the Andrews Labor government would have had anything against the member for Ovens Valley. He has been able to have his day in court—and it was adjourned over many years, which must have been very difficult—and he has been found not guilty. But to then come into this place and use the forms of the Parliament to make spurious allegations and cast aspersions against members of this government—I think that the member for Ovens Valley should just get back and be a decent member of Parliament and actually start delivering for his community. I certainly think if I was going to come after someone, I would come after someone that actually achieved something and is a threat. And for someone that has basically never done anything in this place, says very little about his community, has advocated—you know, I am on a parliamentary committee with this man, and he hardly ever shows up. So if he is going to dish it out in this place, I am going to dish it back, because I do not think that anyone in this government had anything to do with whatever happened before the courts and with the police, and he should use the complaints authorities, IBAC. If he has got something to say, he should use those forms and not dare come into this place under the guise of speaking on a bill, the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021. He should use those forms, and he should use his time in this place to advocate for his community. It is about time he did that, and I think that people in this community would be asking ‘What has he been doing all these years?’ because he has done very little in this place. This is a great piece of legislation by a government that is never afraid to tackle the difficult issues, and I think—no disrespect to the member for South-West Coast, who I respect a great deal—for there to be so little contribution from those opposite on something this important just says a lot about them, especially because they continue every election running law and order campaigns. This just shows how little they care about those matters. Mr BRAYNE (Nepean) (16:50): It is pleasing to follow some wonderful contributions from my colleagues, including the member for Yan Yean. I hope her iPad is okay. I hope it is not broken after that fall. I too rise to speak on the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021. The Andrews government is committed to implementing the recommendations of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants, which emphasise the need for independent monitoring and reporting to support the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. The royal commission’s inquiry uncovered significant historical shortfalls at the heart of Victoria’s criminal justice system and how police use informants with confidentiality obligations. The royal commission made a total of 111 recommendations to address these deficits, and the government will now work to implement all of these recommendations in order to ensure that the events that led to the royal commission can never happen again. One of the key recommendations of the royal commission

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2591 was a governance structure that prioritised independent monitoring and reporting to effectively and transparently implement the royal commission’s recommendations. As such, the royal commission recommended that the government appoint an implementation monitor to independently assess and report to the government on the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. Implementation monitors play an important role in enacting the recommendations of royal commissions, with similar roles having been established following the Royal Commission into Family Violence and of course the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission. The government is committed to implementing all of the commission’s recommendations, and the appointment of an implementation monitor will play a key role in restoring community confidence in Victoria’s criminal justice system. The appointment of an implementation monitor will ensure that the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations is being independently monitored and that the government and other relevant agencies are kept accountable. The confidence of the Victorian community is the pillar of our criminal justice system, and this bill will help to ensure that the circumstances that led to the royal commission never again happen in our state. I will now turn to the specifics of the legislation and those recommendations from the royal commission. This bill will establish the independent statutory office of the police informants royal commission implementation monitor. The bill will also provide for the functions, powers and duties of the implementation monitor to fulfil their role of monitoring the adequacy of the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations and reporting to the government on the progress of implementing these recommendations. As such, the bill will establish a reporting framework for the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations, including annual reporting by the implementation monitor to the Attorney-General and by the Attorney-General to Parliament. These components of the bill will enable the implementation monitor to monitor and assess the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations until the implementation process is complete. The bill will also acquit other recommendations of the royal commission’s final report. First, the bill will acquit recommendation 109. This recommendation requires the government to provide the implementation monitor with the support of a secretariat located within the Department of Justice and Community Safety to assist with their duties. This recommendation also requires that the government provide the implementation monitor with all necessary legislative powers required to fulfil their role. These powers include assessing the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations throughout the implementation process, accessing cross-agency implementation task force documents and attending meetings of the implementation task force, informing responsible agencies of whether their implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations is adequate and requesting reports from Victoria Police on its progress to fulfilling its disclosure obligations to persons who have been identified by the royal commission as being potentially affected. Each of these powers is provided for in the bill and each will allow the implementation monitor to fulfil their role and will help to provide the Victorian community with confidence that the commission’s recommendations are being implemented. This bill will also facilitate the acquittal of recommendations 110 and 111 of the royal commission’s final report. Recommendation 110 will require the government to report to the Attorney-General annually on the progress of the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations as well as on the adequacy of implementation and what further measures may be required for the timely implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. Meanwhile recommendation 111 will require that the Attorney-General report annually to the Victorian Parliament on the progress of the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. The acquittal of these two recommendations will ensure that the government and the Attorney-General are reporting to one another about the progress of implementing these important recommendations. Regarding others, the bill will also facilitate the acquittal of recommendation 108 of the royal commission’s final report. This recommendation requires that the government appoint an independent implementation monitor within three months of the delivery of its final report. Consistent with the recommendation the government appointed Sir David Carruthers as the implementation monitor

BILLS 2592 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 earlier this year, in February. In seeking to enforce good implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations the bill requires that the Attorney-General be satisfied that an implementation monitor has a strong understanding of multi-agency environments and a knowledge of the subject matter relevant to the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. Sir David not only meets these expectations but exceeds them. He is an eminent member of the legal community, having been appointed as a judge of New Zealand’s Family Court and the Youth Court in Wellington in 1985. He then went on to become the chief district court judge in 2001. Sir David’s experience also extends to police matters, with him having been appointed to the chair of the New Zealand Parole Board in 2005 before becoming chair of the New Zealand Independent Police Conduct Authority in 2012. Sir David is the right choice for the implementation monitor, and his presence will play an important role in ensuring the integrity of this process. The final report of the royal commission emphasised the need for cooperation between all stakeholders in order to achieve a purposeful implementation of the commission’s recommendations. As such, the government has consulted with all Victorian bodies responsible for implementing the royal commission’s recommendations, with these key stakeholders being supportive of the bill and acknowledging the important role that the implementation monitor will play in ensuring that the royal commission’s recommendations are implemented in a timely manner. Agencies that will be subject to the implementation monitor’s powers have also acknowledged the role that the implementation monitor will play in delivering the royal commission’s recommendations. The government is committed to a collaboration between all these stakeholders, with cooperation between agencies being essential in order to prevent the circumstances that led to the creation of the commission from ever happening again. The implementation monitor will take a leading role in overseeing the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations, with the creation of this role helping to ensure that the acquittal of the recommendations is outcome focused. By seeking outcome-focused results of the implementation process this bill will take significant steps towards providing the Victorian community with confidence that the recommendations of the royal commission will be enacted in a practical and effective manner. In addition to introducing this bill the government is also supporting the delivery of the royal commission’s recommendations by releasing an implementation plan and an $87.9 million funding package. This plan consists of 54 recommendations directed to the government and outlines the principles-based framework agreed to by the bodies responsible for the royal commission’s remaining 57 recommendations. This almost $88 million of funding will go to the Department of Justice and Community Safety, the Office of Public Prosecutions, Victoria Legal Aid and the Victorian Legal Services Board commissioner, Victoria Police, the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission and the courts to support full implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations. Finally, as part of this funding package $2.03 million has been committed to establish an office of the implementation monitor, from which the important work of monitoring and reporting on the implementation of the commission’s recommendations will take place. Alongside this funding this bill will take the necessary steps for an independent implementation monitor to fulfil their role and to support all agencies, with responsibilities to do so fully. The circumstances that led to the creation of the royal commission were of course extremely serious and significant, and it is imperative that action is taken to ensure that these events never happen again in this state. This bill marks an important step forward in strengthening and restoring public confidence in our criminal justice system with the oversight that the implementation monitor will provide, helping the government to act on all of the royal commission’s recommendations and deliver strong reforms. This bill is another example of the Andrews government listening to the recommendations of royal commissions and taking all necessary actions to address identified shortfalls. I am delighted to speak today in support of this legislation. I commend it to the house.

BILLS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2593

Following speech incorporated in accordance with resolution of house today: Ms COUZENS (Geelong) I am pleased to contribute to the Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill 2021. The Police Informants Royal Commission Implementation Monitor Bill (bill) will establish the independent statutory office of the police informants royal commission implementation monitor (implementation monitor). The bill provides the implementation monitor with the appropriate powers to assess and report on the progress and adequacy of implementation of the Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants (royal commission) recommendations until implementation is complete. The establishment of an implementation monitor is a key recommendation from the royal commission. The Victorian government established the royal commission on 3 December 2018 to independently inquire into matters that go to the heart of Victoria’s criminal justice system over more than two decades. The commission’s extensive and detailed inquiry uncovered significant historical shortfalls in the criminal justice system and made a total of 111 recommendations to address these deficits and give the community confidence in the system going forward. The implementation monitor is a key mechanism recommended by the royal commission to oversee the implementation of its recommendations. This bill will: establish the functions of the implementation monitor; confer on the implementation monitor the necessary powers to perform their functions under the bill; establish a reporting framework for the implementation of the royal commission’s recommendations, including annual reporting by the implementation monitor to the Attorney-General, and by the Attorney- General to Parliament. The bill will acquit recommendation 109 of the royal commission’s final report. That recommendation requires the Victorian government, in establishing the role of the implementation monitor to provide the implementation monitor with the support of a small secretariat located within the Department of Justice and Community Safety, and all necessary and reasonable legislative powers required to fulfil their role, including the power to: (a) assess the implementation of the commission’s recommendations throughout the implementation process, not only once responsible agencies have reported on the completion of implementation (b) access implementation taskforce documents and attend meetings of the implementation taskforce (c) indicate to responsible agencies the extent to which their implementation of the commission’s recommendations is considered adequate (d) request regular reports from Victoria Police on its progress in fulfilling its ongoing disclosure obligations to potentially affected persons identified by the commission (e) request reports from the special investigator on progress to establish their operations and the outcomes of their investigations (f) request reports from the Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police on the progress and outcomes of any disciplinary proceedings arising from the special investigator’s disciplinary investigations. The bill’s reporting framework also facilitates the acquittal of two other recommendations, being 110 and 111. Recommendation 110 requires the Victorian government, in establishing the role of the implementation monitor, to report to the Attorney-General annually, or more frequently as it deems necessary, on the progress of the implementation of the commission’s recommendations, the adequacy of implementation and what further measures may be required to ensure the commission’s recommendations are implemented fully within the specified timeframes. Recommendation 111 requires that the Attorney-General reports annually to the Victorian Parliament on the progress of the implementation of the commission’s recommendations until implementation is complete. Consistent with recommendation 108 of the royal commission that required the Victorian government, within three months, to appoint an independent implementation monitor, the government appointed Sir David Carruthers to the position in February this year. Sir David is an eminent member of the legal community. He was appointed as a judge of New Zealand’s Family Court and the Youth Court in Wellington in 1985 and then Chief District Court Judge in 2001.

MOTIONS 2594 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

In 2005, Sir David was appointed chair of the New Zealand Parole Board and in 2012 became chair of the New Zealand Independent Police Conduct Authority. He was made a distinguished companion of the New Zealand order of merit in 2005 and was knighted in 2009 for his service to the district courts. Following the passage of the bill he will be formally appointed into the new statutory position. The final report of the royal commission emphasised the need for all stakeholders to work together to achieve a purposeful implementation. The implementation monitor will take the lead role in oversighting the implementation of royal commission recommendations and ensuring that acquittal of recommendations is outcomes focused. Agencies that will be subject to the implementation monitor’s powers have acknowledged the important role of the implementation monitor in ensuring the royal commission’s recommendations are delivered in a timely manner and consistent with the royal commission’s outcomes focus. The government is committed to a collaborative implementation with all stakeholders to ensure the commission’s objectives are met and the circumstances that gave rise to the commission can never happen again. On 7 May 2021, the Attorney-General released the government’s response to the final report of the royal commission, alongside an implementation plan and $87.9 million funding package. The plan focuses on actions to implement the royal commission’s 54 recommendations directed to government. It also outlines the principles-based framework agreed to by all other bodies responsible for the implementation of the remaining 57 recommendations. The almost $88 million funding will go to the Department of Justice and Community Safety, Office of Public Prosecutions, Victoria Legal Aid and Victorian Legal Services Board and Commission, Victoria Police, the Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission and the courts to support implementation of the royal commission recommendations. As part of this funding package, a total of $2.03 million has been committed to establish the office of the implementation monitor. A robust governance structure has also been established and government is working closely with all agencies with implementation responsibilities to ensure the shortfalls uncovered by the royal commission are addressed. This legislation provides the implementation monitor with all necessary and reasonable powers required to fulfil their role, and to support all agencies with responsibilities for implementation to do so fully. I commend the bill to the house. Ms SPENCE (Yuroke—Minister for Multicultural Affairs, Minister for Community Sport, Minister for Youth) (17:00): I move:

That the debate now be adjourned. Motion agreed to and debate adjourned. Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day. Motions BUDGET PAPERS 2021–22 Debate resumed on motion of Mr DONNELLAN: That this house takes note of the 2021–22 budget papers. Ms THOMAS (Macedon—Minister for Agriculture, Minister for Regional Development) (17:00): What a great privilege and honour it is to return from the winter break to take note of yet another fantastic Andrews Labor government budget. The budget of 2021–22 is doing what the people of our community have come to expect from the Andrews Labor government—it is focused on creating jobs and opportunities. It is ensuring that we care for people across our state no matter where they live. And like all of our budgets before, it invests in the infrastructure we need but also delivers some very important social reforms, including of course our commitment to deliver on the rebuild of our mental health system here in Victoria to ensure that we have a mental health system in place that responds to the real needs of Victorians no matter where they are. It takes note of and privileges the experiences

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2595 of those who have lived with mental illness or indeed have cared for people with mental illness. We have listened to those people. We have heard from them that the system is broken, and we have worked to ensure that we are on a pathway to rebuilding that system and ensuring that we are providing the mental health services that people need. It certainly is yet another fantastic Andrews Labor government budget, and I am very proud to be speaking on it today. I want to speak firstly about my own electorate and the people of Macedon and again say what a privilege it is to represent those people in this place and to see every day when I am in my electorate, in every town that I go through, the real and material changes that have occurred because we have an Andrews Labor government in power that is delivering for the towns and the communities that I represent. Nowhere is this more evident than in our investments in education. We have transformed the education offering to children in my community, and this budget continues to do so. I know that this is a pleasure that is shared by my colleagues here in the Andrews Labor government—that is, ringing our principals, or in this case the acting principal, on budget day to let them know of commitments that are being made to their schools. This year it was fantastic to ring Sarah Rose, who is acting principal for a term— Ms Ward: Fantastic. What a great day for her. Ms THOMAS: It was an excellent day, thank you, member for Eltham—to let her know that we were committing $12.93 million to Gisborne Secondary College. Gisborne Secondary College is the largest school in my electorate. It is a really great school. It is everything that you want in a comprehensive regional high school. It offers that breadth and depth of curriculum that means that every child that attends that school will have the opportunity to pursue their talents, to really reach their full potential, and this money will contribute to that. The funding will be used to refurbish the school’s block B, as well as delivering new basketball and netball facilities, which are in need of some TLC after years of use. Of course, as I have spoken about often in this place, the community that I represent is absolutely passionate about sport, and our government has continued to support and grow that passion by ensuring that facilities for sports are really topnotch, including at our schools. Now, this really builds on a lot of commitments that have been made in Gisborne, the largest town in my electorate, and indeed it is really exciting to see Willowbank Primary School. We promised a new primary school in the south of Gisborne at the 2018 election. To see that school now being built and to know that it will be welcoming children on the first day of the 2022 year is just so fabulous. Ms Ward: It’s exciting. Ms THOMAS: It is so exciting and, as I have said, it is one of the greatest privileges of being a member in this house, in this place and in this government, to be able to deliver these investments in our community that are going to make such a great change. What this means in Gisborne is that now every government school in Gisborne has received substantial funding from this government, and every child will have a neighbourhood primary school close to home as well as an exceptional secondary college. Of course everyone also knows that in regional Victoria investment in our emergency services is vital, and again I am really pleased to see the investments that have been made by our government in ensuring that our CFA volunteers have the facilities and the resources that they need. This budget announced that Metcalfe CFA will be receiving a new station; $890 000 has been allocated to Metcalfe CFA. I have got to tell you, Metcalfe captain Murray Blaskett has been a regular correspondent of mine. I have always taken up the opportunity to head out to the AGM and hear from the brigade about what their needs are, and I have always undertaken to advocate on behalf of the brigade. Again, what another great phone call to be able to make on budget day, to let these hardworking volunteers know that their service, their commitment is valued and will be recognised by building a new fit-for-purpose station for them.

MOTIONS 2596 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

The budget also continues our investments in roads, again in Macedon. Once again we all know that safe roads are absolutely critical in regional Victoria, and I am very proud of the investments that our government has made and of the great work that the Minister for Roads and Road Safety is undertaking. He gets country roads. He understands that fixing country roads is really vital for us in regional Victoria. So this budget has allocated $6 million for safety upgrades along Black Forest Drive between Woodend and Macedon. This is really about ensuring that that road is safe for all road users. I look forward to seeing the plans for that safety upgrade shortly, but again remain committed to ensuring that our roads across Macedon, as I said, are safe for all road users. It is important to note, though, that this commitment is on top of so many others that have already been made. We are improving crucial arterial roads throughout Macedon, including the Melbourne- Lancefield Road; the safety upgrades there, $20 million of investment, are now complete. Station Road and Saunders Road—the project to put lights in and make that a safe intersection is coming along really well. And of course we will be building a roundabout on the Gisborne-Kilmore Road. Now, I have talked a little bit about mental health already. This is so important in the community that I represent and the many community organisations that I have had the good fortune to meet with and get to know so well over the time that I have been the member from Macedon. These include the Macedon Ranges Suicide Prevention Action Group—Mr Spag or Mrs Pag, depending on your frame of mind; P.S. My Family Matters; Youth Live4Life; and HALT, Hope Assistance Local Tradies, which is an organisation that is out of the member for Bendigo West’s electorate but works in my electorate, just to name a few of the many community organisations that have advocated for so long and were so pleased to see our government do the hard work, admit the problem and then take the very big step of establishing a royal commission and, as we have done previously with the Royal Commission into Family Violence, commit at the get-go to implementing every single one of the recommendations of these royal commission reports. And indeed our budget is doing that: $3.8 billion was invested in the budget to transform our mental health system, and I am delighted that $954 million of that money will be dedicated to improving access to services in regional Victoria. It is also of course a great honour and privilege to be part of the budget process this year as the Minister for Agriculture and Minister for Regional Development. I want to acknowledge my predecessor and good friend the Attorney-General in the other place, who did a lot of the groundwork for a lot of the budget announcements that were made in these portfolios this year. If I try and capture it all in a nutshell, what we are doing in regional Victoria is continuing to invest in those communities that are undergoing change or transition or are too dependent on single employers. We are out there actively generating, creating that sort of economic diversity with a focus on jobs and opportunities. Particularly for young people that already live in regional Victoria, what we want to see is that people that live in rural and regional Victoria have opportunities to pursue their careers and have their aspirations fulfilled in the area in which they grew up, because we want to keep some really great talent, obviously, in regional Victoria. Ms Ward: Keep it local. Ms THOMAS: Absolutely. Thank you again, member for Eltham. I wholeheartedly agree with your interjections. Ms Ward: Encouragement. Ms THOMAS: Yes, encouragement. In Victoria’s south-west our budget has invested $17.4 million to create jobs and continue the economic diversification of Portland and the communities across the Glenelg shire. What a great day it was to be able to visit the Shire of Glenelg to meet with the mayor, Cr Anita Rank, with of course the hardworking Minister for Training and Skills and Minister for Higher Education in the other place, a very passionate local member for the community of Portland, to announce this funding. This money means that Portland can see—and the communities can see—real opportunities to diversify their economy, create new jobs and ensure a strong future for their region.

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2597

Now, over the other side of the state, in Morwell, of course the budget delivered $10 million for the Morwell food-manufacturing precinct. We believe, along with the Latrobe City Council, that this precinct has the capacity to support up to 1700 ongoing manufacturing jobs. And it was an investment that not surprisingly was very welcome not only for local member Ms Shing, a very hardworking member for Eastern Victoria in the other place, but also for the Independent member for Morwell himself, who praised this investment as indeed this is a project that he had been advocating for. If I look too to our agriculture sector, again I thank my colleague Minister Symes for the agriculture strategy. This is the first time in Victoria that we have a strategy, a vision, to continue to grow our agriculture sector. There are some critical pieces of work that we are investing in, and chief amongst those is $11.7 million for our agriculture traceability systems. This is about protecting Victorian jobs and ensuring that we can continue to access global markets so people can have real confidence in their food, being able to source it right back through a supply chain and knowing that it comes from Victoria, the home of some of the freshest, greenest and obviously— Mr Edbrooke: Tastiest. Ms THOMAS: tastiest, best primary produce in the world. This is another fantastic Andrews Labor government budget. It has been a real privilege to be part of this government and to see so much that has been achieved as a consequence of our government’s investments in people right across this state, including across rural and regional Victoria. Ms STALEY (Ripon) (17:15): I rise to speak on the take-note motion. As the house would be aware, I have already spoken on the budget, but I want to concentrate on the projects for Ripon—those that are there and those that are not there. Unfortunately the second category is longer than the first. So I start with the project that both the government and I committed to back in 2018, and that is the redevelopment of the Maryborough hospital. That is a big project; it is a $100 million project, and I remember that at the time the government was very quick to come out and attack me and the Liberal Party because we dared to suggest that we would be delivering this project over two terms. We believed that there needed to be some planning done—we would do the planning—and then in the second term we would build the project. Well—surprise, surprise—the government has at last put some money into building this project and it is all going to be in the next term. So it is a clear broken promise: the government go out and say, ‘We’re going to deliver this project, this $100 million redevelopment of the Maryborough hospital, and by the way, those evil Liberals over there, you can’t believe them because they’re going to do it over two terms’, but then, lo and behold, they are doing it over two terms. Mr D O’Brien: Who would have thought? Ms STALEY: Who would have thought, member for Gippsland South, that the Labor Party would put out a misleading media release? But to get that project is important for Maryborough. It is a significant redevelopment of that hospital. It is the largest project that Maryborough has seen in terms of a building project for several decades, and it will transform health care in the Central Goldfields shire. But then we have crickets. If we think about the other projects that the communities have been crying out for, that they have had me advocate for—and I have taken to that job with relish, but unfortunately I have not succeeded because this government just does not care about so many things that are needed in the electorate of Ripon—I think top of the list for leading people on and then not delivering would have to be the St Arnaud aged-care facility. St Arnaud’s hospital and aged-care facility is in desperate need of rebuilding. It is not fit for purpose. It is a very old building. The government went to East Wimmera Health Service and said, ‘We want you to bid for some money to get it redeveloped. We want to redevelop government-owned aged care in Victoria’. So St Arnaud dutifully did the work to create the project and put in a request for $27 million for stage 1 of this project. Now, you would have thought, since they had been asked to put in a submission, they would have at least received a ‘Sorry, you didn’t get there this time’ or ‘Thank you for your submission’, but again it was crickets. They got

MOTIONS 2598 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 nothing. They did not get the money, and they did not get an explanation about why they did not get the money. That project remains outstanding. If we go to a much smaller project, the Charlton Traffic Safety Education Centre, CHARTSEC, this has been going for many years. It has many volunteers. It has huge school support. It teaches 15- and 16-year-olds how to drive in a controlled environment. I have been out to CHARTSEC many times, and the children do two parts: they do a practical part where they drive around and then they do a theory part in what was the old Charlton police station. It is a 1950s demountable police station; it is wholly unfit for purpose. It is under $500 000, yet the government could not find the money for that. Also, while I am on that part of the world, that northern part of Ripon, I need to talk about the Dunolly housing project. Now, the government has made much about its very big housing build funds. There is a project in Dunolly that will deliver low-income housing. It is fully scoped; the designs are done. It has a cosponsor with the hospital. All it needs is $3 million to get going, and then it is done. Then all these people in Dunolly who live in houses that are uninsulated, that are not really suitable for somebody elderly to live in at all, could have a secure and nice home—you know, a smallish home but a very, very huge upgrade on what they have got at the moment—but again, there was nothing. The government said no, they are not having that. That kind of project is not being considered, yet billions are being spent elsewhere. Further south in my electorate one that has now been outstanding for many years and is part of a complete disaster of project management by this government is the Western Highway duplication. We know that the Western Highway duplication between Buangor and Ararat is completely stalled. They really do not know. The government does not have a plan to get that project restarted. I cannot see it restarting for 18 months, if then. But then there is the other bit of that project, and that is the bit of the project from Ararat to Stawell. Now, I talked about this project last year. The federal government have put up their share. Eighty per cent of the funding is federal government funding, and they put that up last year. It is still there as well. The state government only has to put in 20 per cent. Now, that is $90 million. It is the cheapest stretch of road for the length of the road the government would ever get. They would only be paying 20 cents in the dollar—but no. It is a completely separate project to the bit that is wrecked with Buangor to Ararat. They are completely separate issues. There is no reason the government could not get on and duplicate that road between Ararat and Stawell. Instead that road, which is the Western Highway—a major highway from Melbourne to Adelaide—has had nothing done to it, and it is really unsafe. There are really big potholes. It is an incredibly unsafe piece of road. Accidents happen there all the time. These are the projects that the people of Ripon need and that they deserve, yet this government has once again abandoned them. In my remaining time I do want to talk about some of the results in the economy that we have seen since the government’s budget came down that make it very unlikely that the government will achieve its forecasts, and as a result we will see, unfortunately, higher unemployment, we will see lower migration and economic growth will be lower than expected. Today the Australian Bureau of Statistics put out its latest data on population. What we see is that Victoria has continued to be the largest loser of population: 8273 people left Melbourne. Some of those went to country Victoria, but 4864 people left Victoria altogether. Now, the reason this matters to the budget is that the budget has forecast that there will be 1.9 per cent growth in population, and population drives a lot of the economic growth in this state. Already in the budget the unemployment rate in Victoria was forecast by the Andrews Labor government to be higher in the forward years than the Australian rate, so they already believe that they will have higher unemployment than the Australian rate, and now with the population fall it does not bode well for employment. We have also had some data from various sources in the last little while that demonstrates that the way the government has dealt with the pandemic in terms of business, and particularly small business, has not delivered results for these small businesses. Vistaprint, a printing company, did a survey of small businesses, and what they found was that Victorian small business owners are twice as likely to have remortgaged their family home—that is, 10 per cent of small businesses versus a national average of

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2599

5 per cent; 60 per cent of Victorian small business owners have been forced to dip into their savings; and around the same amount have cut back on household expenditure. Only two out of three small business owners in Victoria are optimistic about the future, so one in three is not—one in three remains very pessimistic about the future. This is a segment that this government just has not got right, at every level. Every time they come out with a support package, what we find is they get the industry codes wrong or they are too limited, or they create anomalies that just should not be there, or they leave out huge groups of small businesses because they either are not registered for GST or they operate in a way that the government does not recognise. Repeatedly the Treasurer has said, ‘Well, we don’t have a taxation relationship with those small businesses’. That should not be the criteria for which you get assistance; need should be the criteria for which you get assistance. And yet over and over this government has not been able to do that. So it is perhaps not surprising that Victoria has the weakest small and medium enterprise business conditions in the country, and we also have the weakest small and medium enterprise business confidence in the country. That is the recent NAB survey that came out last week. Interestingly and somewhat depressingly, Victorian consumers are not immune from this. Victoria recorded the highest consumer stress levels due to government policy, despite the fact that New South Wales had more stress in other ways. So of all the ways you could have consumer stress, the one that Victorian consumers really honed in on was government policy. They know that we are not all in this together when it comes to this government, that this government is not standing up for them, and as a result Victorians in June on the most recent ABS household survey were far more pessimistic about how long it will take for life to get back to normal compared to other Australians, and this has also increased since the previous data collection in November. For all of these reasons the government’s budget forecasts are very unlikely to be met across a range of factors. And then when we put on top of that the government’s inability over their entire period in office to get on top of their wages bill, it suggests to me that we are going to have a problem there on the expenditure side. So the government has bravely—in the Sir Humphrey sense of the word—forecast a 2 per cent wages increase over the next year, yet they have not achieved less than 5 per cent over their entire time in government. They have got the teachers wanting 7 per cent a year, they have a number of other enterprise agreements that are yet to be concluded, and there is no chance they are going to be coming in at 2 per cent. They have not yet. The last couple of years they have been closer to 10 than 2. It is a very brave forecast that the government has put in, and in my mind a totally unrealistic one that is very unlikely to be met. Of course if their wages bill blows out above where they expect it to be, then that blows out the budget deficit even further, and Victoria is the only state that has budget deficits as far as the eye can see. It has no plan to narrow those. We will be having budget deficits as long as we have an Andrews Labor government. They have made it clear that that is not a priority of theirs. I thank the Parliament for giving me the opportunity to speak on the take-note motion and the budget. Once again, this budget has not been for Victoria what it needs to be, and unfortunately Victorians will be paying the price for that for decades to come. Ms CONNOLLY (Tarneit) (17:30): Well, it gives me a great deal of pleasure to rise to speak on this year’s budget here today. I have to say I am going to turn it up a notch, because I am going to talk about some great stuff our Labor government is doing to deliver for Victorian families, in particular in the mighty outer west in my patch of Tarneit. It has been absolutely fantastic to see how our government has delivered on our promises over the last 2½-ish years, and for my families in Tarneit we have been able to see firsthand just how much these commitments have been able to change our lives and the benefit they are having for our local community. I was just reminded a moment ago about the commute times that have been slashed on the morning peak on Palmers Road—20 minutes have been slashed for drivers on their morning peak commutes to work—and along Leakes Road, which indeed used to be one of the busiest roads in my electorate. Since being upgraded by the $1.8 billion western roads project, which is now complete, there has been

MOTIONS 2600 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

12 minutes slashed off drivers’ commute times along that road. And indeed I have just received a message from one of my constituents which gave me a really big smile, because they compared Leakes Road, which is a blood line in my community, being freed up to driving on one of the highways with no traffic. I think that in itself—saying Leakes Road was like driving on an open freeway—is indeed an example of how wonderful that $1.8 billion western roads investment has been in my community. You know, we have got the Old Geelong Road level crossing; I would say Hoppers is losing its Crossing. That level crossing removal is well and truly underway, with major works having happened late on Saturday evening—this Saturday just gone. Incredible works are underway in that patch of my electorate. Three brand new schools have been delivered in three years, with tens of millions of dollars in upgrades to existing schools completed or well and truly underway, and works are well underway for delivering those additional and upgraded parking spaces there at Tarneit station. These are just some of the local funding commitments our government made at the last election, which my community can see that we are going on and delivering. I think now with this budget we as a government are looking forward. It is time for new investments and it is time for new commitments, and that is exactly what we are getting on and doing. And to my community in Tarneit I am so proud to say once again: this budget delivers for you—for you, your family, your kids and the future generations I know you will love and raise in our local community. Early this year we tabled the findings of the historic Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System. We are the first government in Australia to go ahead and take charge in this space—and I think we should take a moment to reflect on that; that is a huge, huge achievement—and I sincerely hope that we will not be the last. Now, in a year like no other, mental health has been really, really important. What we have learned from the royal commission is that for far too long our health system has been overburdened and understaffed when it comes to mental health, and what we are saying as a government is ‘No more’. Our government has made it clear that we are fully prepared to tackle Victoria’s mental health issues, and we are not going to shy away from putting in the work and putting in investment. In fact that is why we have funded a monumental $3.8 billion package to rebuild our mental health system. Now, this will create over 3000 new jobs, but it is also going to begin the process of rebuilding our mental health system from the ground up. These steps are going to include a $200 million fund for mental health programs in our schools, ensuring young Victorians have access to the care that they need and the care that they deserve. This spending will also focus on delivering community-based services, providing more help for those with acute needs and earlier intervention—really important early intervention for Victorians in crisis mode. But what I really want to talk about is what this budget means for families in Tarneit specifically. There is a lot I can talk about because we got a lot in this budget, but there is no better place to talk about than schools. When it comes to schools in Tarneit, our government is continuing to go above and beyond. Not too long ago we announced land acquisition for three brand new schools in Tarneit, including two primary schools and a very much needed but elusive secondary school for Tarneit. Having talked to people in my community with children that are currently in primary school, it is just remarkable to see their reaction, knowing that that high school for Tarneit that they have been talking to me about for some years now is well and truly going to be on its way, with land acquisition there in Tarneit. I talked about land acquisition for the new high school in Tarneit, but I must say that we are also going on and have announced the construction funding for a brand new high school for Truganina. The community knows that this is a high school that has been needed for many, many years, and I have to say it is indeed a very welcome announcement from our government. I am very excited to say that the budget is also going to deliver funding to build new schools, with Tarneit Missen House and Riverdale East primary schools both opening in 2023 and Trug North secondary opening in 2024. But we are not stopping there, because this budget is also laying really important groundwork for another two schools. I have just talked about the brand new high school for

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2601

Tarneit, but we are also looking at land acquisition and have just funded land acquisition for another primary school in Tarneit. Whether I am talking to parents or talking to teachers or principals at local schools in Tarneit, what I hear is that we need to be building more primary schools to deal with the population growth that is currently happening in Wyndham, but we also need another high school to take the pressure off Tarneit Senior. When we got into government at the last election we promised to build and we promised to open 100 new schools over eight years, and by 2024 we will have built and we will have opened seven new schools in seven years in Tarneit, so by 2026 that could be nine schools just in Tarneit alone. We are a growing community and I am constantly hearing about how we need to build more schools, and this budget can reassure families in my local community, old and new, that these schools are well and truly on their way. And we are not just building new schools. I think this is really important. We are a government that is building new schools, but it is also really important to ensure that we are able to upgrade and look after those older schools. So I was very excited to see that Tarneit Senior College will be getting $5.81 million to deliver its final stage of construction, including brand new classrooms to accommodate 300 additional students. When it comes to schools, we are not just investing in our government schools. Tech schools are also a big winner for this budget, including Wyndham’s tech school, which will receive a share of the $20 million in extra funding. Our tech schools do a really fantastic job of introducing students to STEM skills, and this funding boost I know will do wonders for kids in my local community, because a lot of the existing schools do not have the money to put in this really expensive technology that enables kids to get hands-on experience around STEM and STEAM, and having visited Wyndham Tech School on numerous occasions, I am always absolutely lost for words on the technology that is housed at that place. I most certainly think that when we look at Tarneit—and I feel very proud to say this—and when we talk about Victoria being the Education State, people can look at Tarneit and they can see it in action. But it is not just our schools where our government is delivering for Tarneit. Our roads and our trains are also getting a major boost in this budget—$2 million has been allocated to fund the upgrading and the signalisation of the Boundary Road and Derrimut Road intersection. This is a really dangerous intersection in my local community. Locals have been telling me for years about how worrying and dangerous this intersection has been. I am out and about driving around all the time and I would say that as I have become a well-seasoned or mature driver it does raise the hairs on the back of my neck when I approach and enter this intersection, so I know that $2 million will go a long way to upgrading the safety around the Boundary Road and Derrimut Road intersection. This was a great win that is going to build on our commitment to makes roads safer for everyone. It is not just for cars, I am very pleased to say. I was also very delighted—and it is one of the favourite things of this particular budget for the staff who work tirelessly for our community in my office, and we were very excited—to secure $12 million to fund another two brand new bus routes to service growing estates in the north of our electorate. As the member for Tarneit on a daily basis I am talking to people, and my office is talking to constituents, about the need to get on and deliver more bus routes to new and emerging estates in the local area. There is a lot to do. It was a major victory for the community last year when we were able to fund not one but two new bus routes to service growing estates in Tarneit and Trug. I am very pleased to say that those routes came online a couple of months ago. I am looking forward to being able to get out with the Minister for Public Transport to ride one of these buses and talk to locals along the way. But what we actually needed was another route—numerous ones—to service the growing estates like Rothwell and Elements along Dohertys Road. When they missed out on a bus route last year, I know there were a lot of residents who were really disappointed and they felt disheartened. I told them, ‘Please don’t be disappointed. You will not be forgotten. I will not forget you’. So I was absolutely over the moon to discover that we as a community have been successful in our advocacy campaign and we will finally get our buses through this budget. I want to take the opportunity to thank everyone

MOTIONS 2602 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 who has contacted my office in recent times and over the past 2½-ish years about the need for more buses. Your advocacy and support for my bus campaign up here in this place does not go unheard. Your voice does make a difference. Now, I cannot really talk about the great investments in public transport and not mention the $94 million investment into high-capacity trains along the Wyndham Vale and Melton corridors. Whilst all of our new bus routes and the additional and upgraded parking spaces at Tarneit station will help improve access for commuters, this will not mean much if they cannot get on a train. But thanks to this budget I say to the people commuting in and out of Tarneit that you will be able to, because that $94 million is going to deliver to our local community nine-carriage VLocity trains to run along both those Wyndham Vale and Melton corridors. Tarneit station is the busiest V/Line station outside of Southern Cross. It is something that I not only repeat again and again up here, but my community who use this train station experience on a daily basis, and they certainly remind me on a daily basis of the importance of addressing the population growth in the local area and the need to be able to not only access the station but also be able to get on the train. This is really good news for those commuters because what it is going to mean is that we will have bigger, better trains that are going to increase capacity and most importantly increase capacity during peak periods by up to 50 per cent. This is another fantastic outcome for commuters in Tarneit who can look forward to bigger and better trains. I have to say that as soon as my office and I opened up the budget papers we were absolutely delighted, because we know that not only are we delivering for Victorian families but for the thousands of families in Melbourne’s outer west. There is a lot of need, there is a lot to be done, but gosh, this budget delivered a lot for us. Whether it is the bus routes, whether it is the schools that we are doing or whether it is road safety upgrades, there is something in this for everyone. So I say to my community thank you so much for your advocacy; it has not gone unheard. I cannot wait to get out there and ride those buses with you and cut ribbons at those schools. Mr D O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (17:45): I am pleased to stand up and say a few words about the budget on the take-note budget reply—what are we now?—nearly three months after the budget was actually handed down. It feels a little bit— Mr Hodgett: We’ve run out of money. Mr D O’BRIEN: We have run out of money already, says the member for Croydon. Look, I will start with the positives because it will not take long. We have heard all of those opposite wax lyrical about the heaps of projects that they got, but in country Victoria we are sadly getting used to not having very much. I went into this budget with low expectations, and unfortunately they were met. One thing that we did get, though, was some funding for Sale College. I have been campaigning since 2017 now with Sale College to fund a consolidation of Sale College onto one site. It is currently on two different campuses, junior and senior, and it causes all sorts of issues for the school. And indeed particularly the senior campus, the Macalister campus, is in a pretty ordinary state. We have been campaigning for a long time—we keep getting letters back from the Minister for Education outlining the $7 billion being spent by this government on education capital, all of which is wonderful, if it does not actually happen in Sale or in my electorate—and in this case we finally got somewhere. I have said to the minister several times, and publicly, I was not after $30 million or $40 million to build a school, I just wanted the money to plan it. And, finally, we did get it in this budget—$3 million allocated to Sale College for a master plan to basically look at how we consolidate onto one site, and in particular that will be a decision, to my understanding, as to whether it is consolidated under the Guthridge campus, where there is a bit of space, or ideally onto a new greenfield site. I think the community probably would prefer the new greenfield site, and there are some options there. And there are some opportunities of course for the government and for the Sale community because the Macalister campus is right in the middle of town, in the CBD, and that would free up some quite valuable and useful land in the CBD of town. The

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2603

Guthridge campus is in a residential area as well, between two primary schools, so there is an opportunity for the government to potentially sell that land down the track and help finance a brand new school. So that was good. It was nice to hear that. And thanks to Brendan Staple, the principal at Sale College, who has been a really good urger on this particular issue. He has certainly kept in touch with me, and it was his advocacy that started this process. And we had support from Wellington Shire Council and the Committee for Wellington, and as I said, it is so much more valuable to have those community groups on side in a campaign like this than just having the opposition MP badgering the government for it. But we got there eventually. On the negative side, though, there was very little else for the Gippsland South community in this year’s budget. Speaking of schools, Foster Primary School—the job is about two-thirds done. We got some funding for it a couple of years ago in the budget—still waiting to have that Foster Primary School completed. But one that really irks me and has irked me for a long time now—indeed since I was elected—is fire brigades. Mirboo North, Foster and Yarram fire stations we have been campaigning for literally since 2015. I think I have written to four different ministers on it now, and we just have not seen any significant capital funding for fire stations from this government. Yes, we get little ones here and there—some of the smaller brigades have had some money—but not for these three, which frankly are not only beyond their use-by date but actually dangerous because they are so narrow it is difficult to get modern trucks into them. It is an occupational health and safety issue, because the volunteers have very little room to actually get changed, to turn out, and they are just not in a good state. It is time that the government actually delivered for the CFA stations and the volunteers. This government has delivered in spades for the fire services, and we saw that in the paper yesterday. FRV—the new Fire Rescue Victoria that we were told by this government that we had to have, that no-one actually wanted and no-one had ever recommended—senior management is getting $59.13 million. Mr Hodgett: What? Mr D O’BRIEN: $59.13 million. If you compare that to Victoria Police, it is $8.9 million for VicPol’s senior management, and if you compare it, more relevantly, to Fire and Rescue NSW— $10.8 million. I wonder why I cannot get a fire station at Foster or Yarram or Mirboo North; it is because it is all going to the senior management in this shiny new Fire Rescue Victoria while the CFA and the volunteers are left behind. I did mention last year we got funding for the Winnindoo fire brigade, but to this day the government cannot not tell me how much money it is and when it is going to start. After the budget I could not get an answer, so I wrote to the minister. The acting minister wrote back and said, ‘Yes, we’re very pleased to confirm the Winnindoo fire brigade is going to be built’ but still did not answer the question, still did not tell me what was actually happening. The fire services and our volunteers are being let down by this government. On roads again, the South Gippsland Highway, there are a number of projects on that that I would like to see funded, in particular moving forward with the Leongatha heavy vehicle alternative route or the Leongatha bypass, stage 2. We have done stage 1, which was to get the trucks out of Bair Street. It has left what is known as ‘kamikaze corner’ in Leongatha, one of the most ridiculous, difficult intersections you will come across, where the South Gippsland Highway meets the Strzelecki Highway and the Bass Highway, or Roughead Street, Long Street, Hughes Street and McCartin Street, all in one spot—and a railway line thrown in for good measure, and now a rail trail. That needs to be addressed. If we go to stage 2 and move the intersection further out towards Melbourne, that will address many of the issues, but there is no funding in the budget for this. We have seen funding in the past for planning for the Coal Creek bends at Korumburra on the South Gippsland Highway, where there have been, sadly, a number of fatalities in recent years, but still it

MOTIONS 2604 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 has not progressed any further. I think it was in 2017 that we saw funding for that planning, but there is still no funding for the actual project; likewise for the Grassy Spur between Stony Creek and Foster, another windy, hilly area of the highway, where there are proposals for some straightening of the road but nothing has happened. There are a number of smaller projects in my electorate that really are not that difficult to do but the government just continues to fail to fund. Agnes Falls is one of the most beautiful waterfalls in Victoria. Indeed it is the highest single-span waterfall in Victoria. It is a beautiful spot as the water cascades into a gorge, but it is also on a bend in the river so it is actually a little bit difficult to see the full splendour of the falls. There has been a plan there since the last year we were in government, when we had plans to fund this under regional development, to put a cantilevered viewing platform out into the gorge so that you could actually see the full splendour of the falls. We are talking probably about $750 000, or at least we were—God knows how much it might have gone up now—and we just cannot get this government interested. We write to the minister, we raise it in Parliament and with Parks Victoria, and they say, ‘Oh, we’re doing wonderful things’. Last year I got responses from the minister on Agnes Falls; I got told the government was putting in an all-accessibilities toilet at Wilsons Prom. How that was relevant to Agnes Falls I do not know. Since then, in last year’s budget there was $23 million for Wilsons Prom—that is great—putting that money into one big facility, but we are looking for literally less than $1 million for Agnes Falls. The government could be doing that. Likewise the government likes to spout off about how much funding it is putting into sporting clubs, but there are plenty in my electorate that are still waiting to get access to funding for upgrades to their change rooms or their facilities, whether it is the Korumburra-Bena Football Netball Club, with their new netball courts and female-friendly facilities, Toora Football Netball Club, likewise, or Nyora Football Netball Club. All have big plans for development of very old and outdated facilities but have not seen funding from this government. If the Minister for Transport Infrastructure was here, I am sure she would be talking about all the wonderful things happening in regional Victoria, but even with the ones that the government does announce I do not know why it announces them sometimes. In 2017 we had the Regional Rail Revival project announced. The minister at the time said the project was shovel ready. A member for Eastern Victoria, Ms Shing, in the other place, said that they were ready to go. This was in May 2017. Here we are in August 2021, and the project is only barely beginning, leaving aside the fact that 80 per cent of it is funded by the federal government. The reason it has taken so long initially is that the government said it was shovel ready—‘Oh, but by the way, the federal government’s going to pay for it all’. So the things that are happening in regional Victoria mostly are being funded by the federal government, and they are delayed—I mean, four years! Ms Thomas interjected. Mr D O’BRIEN: It is actually very helpful that the Minister for Regional Development has chirped up there now, because talking about things that have been on the go-slow, in 2017 the government very proudly announced $110 million for new plantations in the Latrobe Valley to help drive the future of the timber industry and particularly the Australian Paper mill—$110 million in 2017—and what has happened here? What has happened with that? How many trees have we got on the ground now? Ms Thomas: Lots of things have been happening. Mr D O’BRIEN: ‘Lots of things have been happening’, says the minister, but she does not answer how many trees are in the ground. We have had the government take 250 hectares of land that previously was under HVP Plantations and claim that as new plantations. So there are 500 hectares of plantations, a drop in the ocean, since that funding was allocated, and we heard at the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee a month ago that it will be winter next year—so 2022; five years after the government announced the funding—before we actually see this funding allocated. Even the things— Ms Thomas: Yes, it is a very complex process. You know that.

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2605

Mr D O’BRIEN: ‘It is a very complex project’, the minister says. A very complex project—well, putting a tree in the ground I would have thought was pretty straightforward. It was very complex, yes, because this government said in 2017 that we should transition to plantations. That was what they said. And now they are finding out it is a very complex project, it is not that simple. Everyone who says we have got to shut down the native timber industry and go to plantations—it is apples and oranges, and the minister is finding that out now. I look forward to her announcement soon on whether these plantations will actually ever go ahead and what will happen with them. I talk about regional Victoria and Gippsland missing out, and I want to just run through some figures on what I am referring to there. These are the sorts that come to me from my community all the time. I want to run through some of the projects in Melbourne: the Metro Tunnel, $12 billion; the North East Link, $15.8 billion; the Level Crossing Removal Project, according to the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office, $14.8 billion, and let us add another $2.5 billion to that with an announcement last week by the Premier, so $17.3 billion; and the West Gate Tunnel. That is another shovel-ready project that the Premier told us in 2014 would be $500 million. Then it went to $6.8 billion, then it went to $9 billion, and according to leaked documents published in the Age last month, on 16 June, it is now $11 billion. So those are four projects in the city at $56 billion—56 thousand million dollars—and I cannot get $750 000 for the viewing platform. I had to wait three years for the Princes Highway duplication between Traralgon and Sale when the federal government had the money on the table—80 per cent of the project was on the table. We had the member for Ripon standing here not 20 minutes ago saying exactly the same thing with the Western Highway. Like I said, federal government money was on the table, but we waited three years. So while there are just four projects for $56 billion, in regional Victoria we are crying out for some of that investment. Now what are we going to have? We are going to have the Suburban Rail Loop. Now a Suburban Rail Loop is actually not a bad idea. I think it is actually a good idea to not have everything going from a one-spoke-and-hub sort of situation. However, I also think it is a good idea that I have a Pacific island to go live on, but I cannot afford it, and I do not know that this state can afford this. We are going ahead with it; this government is going ahead with it. It has put $2 billion into the early works already. We do not even know how much it is going to be. We do not even know the details. We do not know when it is going to be finished. So it could be $50 billion, it could be $150 billion, it could be $200 billion, and how is that going to help the people of rural and regional Victoria who have still got goat tracks to go on? We are still waiting for our rail lines to be upgraded. We have got three trains a day happening from Sale and Bairnsdale to Melbourne, and yet we are going to spend another $150 billion on the metro. These are the things where regional Victoria is missing out. The balance is not right. Regional Victoria is getting dudded. This government is spending billions and billions and billions of dollars— Ms Thomas interjected. Mr D O’BRIEN: As I have just outlined, Minister—in Melbourne, and we are still dealing with absolute garbage in terms of our roads. We are still crying out for hospitals like the West Gippsland hospital, which has still not been committed to by this government. The government needs to get the balance right. Regional Victoria and Gippsland deserve a fair share, and they are not getting it under the Andrews Labor government. Ms THEOPHANOUS (Northcote) (18:00): I am delighted to be speaking on this take-note motion on Labor’s state budget, a budget that is truly one with a heart. At its core it is about creating jobs and caring for Victorians, and it is about making sure that every dollar of investment we make as a government is going towards not just our economic recovery but our social recovery as well. Because the truth is that we have been through, and in some ways we are still going through, one of the most difficult periods of our lives, and some of us have had a tougher time than others and some are having a tougher recovery than others. Many of us are still processing what we went through last year, and as the world and our country continue to grapple with this pandemic we know we are not wholly through it either.

MOTIONS 2606 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

But amid all the heartache, what has shone through brighter than anything else is how Victorians care for each other. We rally around our frontline workers. We check in on people we have never met before. We get behind our local businesses. We put spoons in our gardens and teddies in our windows to bring joy to local kids. This is the social fabric that binds us as Victorians. It is the most valuable thing that we have and something to be nurtured and protected, but every now and then in politics we are presented with this false dichotomy, a choice between a fairer and more caring society and a stronger economy. Here in Victoria we know that dichotomy is a fallacy. Time and again our Labor government has put forward an agenda that puts the wellbeing of Victorian people at the core of a strong, sustainable economy. Empathy and compassion are not weaknesses. They are exactly what has driven and will continue to drive our response to and our recovery from the pandemic. Every budget handed down by the Andrews Labor government has made the conscious choice to support and invest in the people of Victoria, and it has paid off. Job figures are bouncing back to prepandemic levels or above, including for women and young people hit hard during the height of the pandemic. Business confidence is up and our economic growth has surged, and now with this budget we have been driving ahead with building a fairer, stronger and safer state for Victorians by investing in the infrastructure, services and supports that people need to recover, all while creating thousands of jobs along the way. Budgets might look like numbers, but they are about priorities. What we choose to invest in says a lot about who we are and what we value. Labor believes in lifting people up, creating opportunity, embedding fairness and building a better future for Victorians. We are investing in new and upgraded schools, improving our hospital and health networks, upgrading roads and improving public transport. We are delivering more support for grassroots sports, multicultural organisations and social services and delivering lasting change through investment in truth, healing and justice for Aboriginal Victorians. But perhaps most stunningly, this budget takes the brave step of addressing an issue that has never before been taken so seriously, which has never before been made the focal point of a state budget, and that is mental health. It is a monumental challenge to reform a system that for too long has been broken but a challenge we will not shy away from. All of us have experienced poor mental health, or we know someone who has. Anguish is a truly unique human experience born of our ability for self-reflection and our ability to imagine alternate possibilities for our lives. That existential freedom is both our gift and our curse. It has the power to rattle us to our core, to fracture our sense of who we are and what we are here for. The Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System revealed a system unable to wrap its arms around Victorians in moments like this. We need to change that. We committed to implementing every one of its recommendations, and with this budget we are making good on that promise by funding the first stages of a historic transformational change. We are delivering a massive $3.8 billion to change the way we deliver support, with a focus on community-based care so people can access the care they need close to home. It means Northcote locals will be able to access treatment and care regardless of the level of distress they are experiencing. They will no longer be told their condition is too severe or not severe enough. It means dedicated streams of care for adults and older adults as well as ones specifically designed to meet the unique needs of infants, children and young people. For our diverse communities and Aboriginal Victorians it means culturally appropriate services designed and delivered by people with lived experience. Reforming our entire mental health system is not something that will take place overnight. It will require investment and a long-term commitment to change. Ideally it would involve bipartisan support, but clearly that is something that is too much to hope for. It is not enough to call for more mental health support, as those opposite have done, and then lambast the fair and measured decisions required to actually deliver it. We are not about that. We are about acting now and making the changes needed to deliver a brighter future for every Victorian who struggles with their mental health. There are so many things to talk about in this budget, but something very close to my heart is education, because our young people are our future, and as a government and as a society we have a responsibility

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2607 to give them opportunity, aspiration and inspiration as well as the skills to reach their potential and become strong, compassionate agents in the world. In the immortal words of former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, ‘We are all diminished when any of us are denied a proper education’. Understanding and valuing the transformational power of education is a fundamental part of what it means to be Labor. This commitment to our kids, to our future and to our communities is in our DNA. It is why education has been central to every single budget brought forward by this government. It is why this budget embeds over $400 million in funding to deliver the nation-leading three-year-old kinder rollout, an absolutely groundbreaking and generational reform that will give every Victorian child access to two years of play-based learning before school. I cannot overstate how important this reform is, which not only will mean huge investments in building and upgrading our early learning centres and training and employing educators and the workforce but fundamentally will set children up to succeed throughout their lives, and the evidence is clear on that. Our budget truly gets on with delivering the Education State, and for my community it has been really, really transformative. It has meant new schools for our growing suburbs, like the incredible new Preston High School. It has meant new learning spaces, like those recently completed or underway at Bell Primary, at Northcote Primary, at Wales Street Primary, at Fairfield Primary, at Alphington Primary and at Preston South Primary. It has meant students having the facilities they need to be inspired and prepared for the jobs of the future, like the brand new state-of-the-art STEAM centre being built right now at Thornbury High School. It has meant more inclusive, welcoming environments for students with disabilities and additional needs, with more support for students with autism and inclusive play spaces like those we are building Croxton special school and Westgarth and Thornbury primary schools. For our parents it means even greater confidence that our kids are getting the best start in life, with genuine pathways into employment. This budget builds on this extraordinary legacy with another $3.5 billion invested in education, and in incredible news for the residents of Northcote it includes $8 million to deliver a much-needed upgrade to Northcote High School, including a brand new state-of-the-art STEM centre. Northcote High is one of the largest government schools in Victoria and a cherished part of our community. It has been facing significant challenges with booming enrolments and ageing infrastructure on a very tight little footprint. Together the school community and I have worked closely for over two years to put forward our vision for the future of the school, and we have been supported by an incredibly positive campaign from the local parents and the students. On budget day it was quite remarkable. I was able to make that emotional phone call to now former principal Harrap to say, ‘We did it. All our work paid off’. This funding will deliver a brand new three-storey vertical building with a new STEM centre and modern learning spaces that will allow generations of Northcote High students to explore and expand their interests. From the moment I became the member for Northcote I have worked closely with all our local schools on their varying needs, and these latest investments mean the total funding for schools across the Northcote electorate over the last couple of years is now over $78 million. Only Labor has a commitment to education built into its bones. Only Labor will deliver for our local schools. This includes caring for our students’ mental health and wellbeing. Last year was particularly tough for our kids and our young people, and we know that schools can play and have played a vital role in caring for students’ wellbeing. This budget rolls out a $277 million program of student supports, including expanding our mental health in primary schools program and setting up the new School Mental Health Fund so schools themselves can choose from a range of evidence-based programs that meet the specific needs of their students. What that means is that a student at Northcote High, Thornbury High or Preston High who may be feeling at their lowest has someone qualified and compassionate that they can reach out to when they are in crisis, it means our beloved primary teachers will have the tools and the supports they need to help kids they care so deeply about and it means our parents know that when their child heads out the door to the school they are not alone.

MOTIONS 2608 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

We have not shied away from confronting some of the biggest challenges facing our state, including mental health, the prevention of family violence, climate action and homelessness. I will just refer briefly, because I do not have much time left, to the $5.3 billion we have invested in our Big Housing Build to address homelessness and housing affordability, delivering 12 000 new social housing dwellings across our state—enormous. I will mention briefly as well the $1.6 billion in clean energy initiatives, truly making Victoria a global leader when it comes to climate action, and I thank the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change for her strong advocacy in that. This budget also includes $70 million to establish public IVF services, something that is incredibly important to so many families who are looking to have a child and share in the joy of having a child but need that extra support to get there. I was so pleased to see that in there. There is also some funding in the budget for planning for an emergency department at the Austin Hospital, the closest hospital to the Northcote electorate. Many of our constituents use it, and so that is very much welcomed. Only Labor has the courage and the conviction to stand up and actually tackle these really important issues head-on, and it is doing it in a way which ensures that every dollar is creating more employment opportunities for everyday Victorians. We are doing it in a way that ensures that no-one is left behind. We are building a thriving economy and a caring community at the same time, because they are not mutually exclusive. They are in fact the only way forward. In my last few moments I commend the Treasurer on this vitally important budget, the work that he has put into delivering it and the stewardship that he has demonstrated in leading our state not just out of this pandemic but to a brighter future. Ms SHEED (Shepparton) (18:16): I am pleased to rise to speak on the budget reply motion. It seems like a long time ago that the budget was announced here in Parliament, and yet it is not that long. The fact that we had two budgets last year also disorients us a bit I think in terms of what is happening and how our communities are getting along. I would like to start by focusing more on my electorate and how it has fared through budgets and of course through the current pandemic. I think the context of this last budget has been quite different. During 2020 there was certainly a very significant push to keep the economy on track, to fund major projects and to fund many other projects that were shovel-ready, with a view to keeping the economy going, keeping people in employment and dealing with what was really the great unknown. This budget, the 2021–22 budget, is really a more modest budget. It seems to me that there are not as many blue-sky projects but it is really a case of government holding the fort. Even though there is very considerable expenditure in it, it is more about providing somewhat of a backbone to keep our communities together. Many of our communities have felt very isolated during the last 16 or 18 months since the pandemic started, and I think those lockdown periods, when we see deserted streets, deserted communities, have a real impact certainly on people’s mental health but also on their sense of wellbeing, on their capacity to really understand how they might cope going forward, whether it be financially or in their businesses and the like. It has been very pleasing coming from a rural community to see that in 2020 we had good rains after several years of very dry weather and really worrying drought, and so that rain last year and again this year has seen excellent cropping and it has seen the dairy industry doing really well. That has been an incredible boost for our agricultural and horticultural communities, and in particular in my district. So amongst what has been a very stressful time there are businesses that have really thrived and done well and others that are always at the mercy of the elements that have also done well. My electorate has been the welcome recipient of a number of budget spends, with close to $1 billion being spent over the last seven years since I have been representing the Shepparton district. It has been an investment that we never saw before, and it has been an investment that was really needed. The investment has been spent on essential infrastructure—things like rail, health, education and agricultural aspects as well. In relation to rail we have had something like $356 million invested by

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2609 the Victorian state government, and that was for stages 1 and 2. And then we saw a deal struck with the federal government whereby another $320 million was invested that will see nine V/Locity trains a day travelling between Melbourne and Shepparton—something that many of us would never have imagined when we came to Melbourne on an old rickety train at 6 o’clock in the morning, many in our pyjamas, to demonstrate on the steps of Parliament just to show how much we wanted something done about rail in our region. It has been a great boost to have increased services already—to know that these better, faster services are well on their way and that the works are underway now. In health we have also seen stage 2 of Goulburn Valley Health built, a five-storey tower at the north end of the city which is really quite astounding. It is providing services now that were rehoused from really just a patchwork of other buildings and other departments around what was becoming quite a shabby hospital. A new emergency department, a new special care nursery, a new paediatric ward, new theatres, new wards for patients—these things all make the city of Shepparton in itself a much better place to live and to work. One of the recently funded projects was the Arcadia fish hatchery. Now, this is a project whereby the government has decided to spend $7 million to house a fish hatchery on 170 acres of a property just south of Shepparton. It will be a huge fish hatchery that will breed Murray cod and silver perch—all those species that are so important to our iconic Goulburn River and of course the Murray River. Stocking our rivers on a regular basis is something we have to do, and it is great news for the Shepparton district that that has been located so close to Shepparton—and not only that, there is funding now for tourism aspects to go with it. I think we might one day see a huge Murray cod at the front gate of the fish hatchery. Who knows? There is an opportunity as you head into Shepparton to visit something like the fish hatchery or the new Shepparton Art Museum, which is just astounding but has not yet been formally opened; it will be later in the year. We have got the new fire station in Shepparton that the fire services have recently moved into, and you then see the vista of the new hospital building. So Shepparton in recent years has really come ahead. Of course it is not just about Shepparton; it is about the servicing that we do in a regional city like Shepparton to the whole broader region: up to the Murray and further south towards Nagambie. All these towns and communities benefit from the regional city that they are closest to, where most of their services are provided. The fish hatchery also has set up a training course in conjunction with TAFE to ensure that we have a large Indigenous group of young people employed at the fish hatchery. It was great to see in this year’s budget $10.7 million go to GOTAFE for their Goulburn Murray Trades Skills Centre redevelopment. More apprentices and students will go on to fill skilled roles in our own community. I think we all know and have heard constantly how difficult it is to recruit skilled people to come to country and regional areas, so educating them as our own homegrown students is really something that is needed and that we aim to do. A lot of the processes are now in place as a result of the Shepparton Education Plan: TAFE, La Trobe University and the Melbourne University rural medical school. All these things are part of the story that will see us be able to provide a lot of that depth of educated people that any community needs. It was excellent to just see La Trobe’s recent graduation of their nursing course. Fifty per cent of those student nurses were employed by Goulburn Valley Health in Shepparton—a great strike rate on any view of it, I would have thought. Along with the budget we also received a $6.4 million announcement for Queensland fruit fly control in the Goulburn Valley, Sunraysia and the Yarra Valley. Fruit fly is a scourge that you may not all know about, but when you cut open a piece of fruit and see what is inside when it has been infected by fruit fly it is really horrible. It has a very significant economic impact on our orchards around Shepparton. We produce the pears, the peaches and the apples for most of Australia, and the impact of fruit fly on horticulture in our region has been severe. Interestingly, most of the fruit fly is found in our urban areas, so a lot of this program is about getting people in the urban areas to address the fact that their tomato bushes in the veggie garden, their lemon

MOTIONS 2610 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 trees, their pomegranate trees—whatever they have got—are actually seeding fruit fly. A lot of it is about teaching the urban communities about what is going on, because the farmers know about it and they are doing their own work because it is such a huge financial investment for them. The Verney Road special school received $1 million by way of funding to start looking at its future. It is the main school in Shepparton for children with special needs, children with autism. It is incredibly crowded, and a refurbishment or a full redevelopment is overdue. Work is now well underway following that announcement being made to look at what the future will hold. With the Shepparton Education Plan underway there is real opportunity to start thinking about what we can do for young people in our region who are in mainstream schools but who are not being educated because the education system does not cater to their needs. Very often that is young people with autism. It is a spectrum, as we know, and there is such a huge range of young people who are not being catered to but who sit there not knowing what is going on sometimes. I am very keen to see this study of special needs in our region look at not just those who are already identified as having special needs but those who are already in mainstream schools and not being catered for. The inquiry conducted by the Family and Community Development Committee of this Parliament when they did a study into autism recommended that there should be an autism school in a regional area, and I say Shepparton is the place that that should be, because we are presently rolling out the Shepparton Education Plan with the full support of the government, which has invested over $140 million in education in Shepparton. There is a real opportunity to do a wraparound of all the needs of all young people, to see that everyone is included in the opportunity to get an education, with that view to actually having a pathway, whatever that might be, when they leave school. There were many other budget announcements that our community will benefit from although not directed directly to projects in the region. The $200 million School Mental Health Fund will be very welcome. We have projects in our region such as the neighbourhood schools project that will be looking for funding under this stream of funding that has been made available for multidisciplinary teams that can work and identify with children who have suffered significant trauma and provide early therapeutic intervention so that those children have a chance of moving forward. We will receive a share of the $148 million for the regional Victorian Academy of Teaching and Leadership. Shepparton has been identified as one of the six sites for that, and already applications are being taken for the first round of students. I am very hopeful that teachers in our region will look to upskilling and taking on new qualifications through that process. There is $23 million over the next four years for continuing court programs. We have a drug treatment court that will come to Shepparton gradually, and that has proved successful in other places. We want to see reoffending reduced in our communities. There is support for vulnerable families. There is money for improved bus services, and of all the things that Shepparton needs at the moment one is a review of bus services. Our town has expanded, and there are many areas now to the north and south of Shepparton that are not being serviced by buses in the way we would like them to be. It has been a good budget for Shepparton in a sense, but over the longer term we have seen a real investment that will provide returns to our community in a way that it has been calling out for for so long. It had been neglected for a long time, and we have seen investment in those major areas that really impact people’s lives. Health, education, public transport—all these things really matter. We are a community that is very dependent on water and irrigation, and we are now at a time when we are seeing opportunity for huge investment in energy. We have over 60 solar farm applications proposed, underway or being considered across the Goulburn Valley region, which is really astounding, and I think we have not thought through as a community—as a government even—a strategy as to where these projects would be, where they would be best utilised and the competition between irrigation, land and energy. There are some really big issues that do need to be looked at as we go forward. I commend the budget.

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2611

Mr SCOTT (Preston) (18:30): It is a great pleasure to rise on this take-note debate on the budget, and I would like to make a contribution relating to a number of aspects of the budget. I think the first thing to note is the scale of the Victorian budget in relation to the society, and I am not sure that is completely understood. If you look at the operating statement and then you look at the capital investments, the Victorian budget involves expenditure of over $100 billion. This is a very substantial investment in the Victorian society. It relates to not just the provision of services but the response to the pandemic and the response to the mental health needs of the society. I will touch upon that later, but this is an enormous and significant contribution. I think there are a few trends in public finance that are worth touching upon. In relation to this budget, the Treasurer and the government have made essentially the right call on a number of key issues. The first was in the period post the global financial crisis. There was a debate, particularly in Europe but in other places, around austerity versus public expenditure in relation to crises and contraction of revenue, and the Victorian government along with nearly the entire Western world has taken, I think, the correct decision and not embraced austerity. Instead it has spent money in order to allow businesses and communities to better adjust and deal with the external shock that occurred in relation to the pandemic. The collapse of austerity as a viable philosophy of the political economy is a very significant development in the Western world, because there were many coming out of the global financial crisis who were proponents of austerity and there have been significant parts of the world that have implemented austerity in relation to that. However, coming through the COVID period I think the lessons of the failures of austerity in the immediate aftermath of the global financial crisis meant that austerity was not implemented significantly across the Western world and instead there was a more reasoned and in fact evidence-based approach which sought not to create analogies between budgets, whether it be national governments or sub-sovereign jurisdictions such as in Australia, and rightly saw them as being quite different to households. A false analogy using a household had been fettering the responses to crises in a number of jurisdictions previously, and the collapse of that particular paradigm I think is important and worth noting. So quite correctly the Victorian government chose, instead of cutting public expenditure in response to the economic impact of the pandemic, to intervene to seek to ameliorate some of the consequential issues of the pandemic and indeed ameliorate some broader societal issues whose negative impacts had been accelerated by the pandemic. The most obvious is mental health. I think the other important thing to note contextually in the background to this budget is that the Victorian government and a number of other governments around the world, but particularly Australia and New Zealand and some other jurisdictions in East Asia, correctly called that the economy was benefiting from the absence of COVID rather than attempting to live with the virus. An exponentially growing virus is not a linear problem, and there was an ability in a number of jurisdictions to manage both simultaneously and to see there being a one-to-one trade-off between dealing with the virus and the economy. Thankfully we avoided those problems because we correctly in this jurisdiction and in a number of other jurisdictions around the world saw that the best way to help the economy was in fact not to have the virus present in the society. The empirical evidence is actually overwhelming on this point; it is absolutely overwhelming. In the societies which chose to not have community transmission of COVID, which is a different thing to eradication of COVID, in fact their economies performed much better. So there was not an opposition between the economy and society on the impact of dealing with COVID; dealing with COVID in fact helped the economy. Victoria was lucky enough to be amongst those jurisdictions around the world, and I would like to acknowledge those involved in the response to COVID who were able to see that relationship for what it was. There was a lot of public opinion and discourse to the contrary, but those societies which have sought to eliminate community transmission have in fact had much stronger economies than those who have sought to balance, falsely, the response to the coronavirus with the economic response. So on those broadbrush issues of metasignificance I think it is important that the Victorian government, as encapsulated through this budget, has chosen correctly to stimulate the economy in responding to the economic impacts of COVID and also in the public health response to underpin the public finances and the

MOTIONS 2612 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 broader economy by minimising the impact of the virus on the broader economy by not having community transmission comparable to other societies. And I think those responses have been important in developing and responding in the context of this budget. I would also like to touch upon the mental health investments. If you look at the mental health investments, in 2021–22 there is over $550 million invested, there is over $820 million in the next year, over $930 million in the year after that and over $1 billion in the 2024–25 years in a really comprehensive set of investments to deal with mental health challenges and really change the way in which mental health is dealt with in this state. It has often been described—and I note the work that has been done over many years and particularly in response to the work of the inquiry—that mental health had really had an acute response, a community-based response, in terms of general practitioners who then worked with psychologists and psychiatrists, but between the response of people who were turning up in an emergency department and those who were seeing, say, a psychologist on a care plan there really was an absence of services that meaningfully dealt with the needs within the community. I think that filling in of the gap that this investment provides will benefit the lives of many, many Victorians in a really profound way. I will not run through, because it would more than complete the time that I have available, all of the interventions, but I think it is worth noting that that is a fundamental change. There are significant investments that are made within this budget that really will profoundly change the lives of many, many Victorians, and of course not just those persons suffering from a mental illness but the families and friends around them who often suffer themselves through having to deal with mental illness. I think of the destigmatisation of mental illness, the awareness that mental illness is an issue across the community. There is no shame in people suffering from mental illness, and in fact it is really important that the investments here bridge that gaping hole that existed within the mental health response here in Victoria. Whether it be for children, whether it be for Indigenous communities, whether it be for families and carers, whether it be for people in rural and regional Victoria, whether it be across the board—and as I said, I will resist the temptation to deal with all of the issues in individual areas of investment—this is a really fundamental change in how the society deals with mental health and provides a huge investment. I think it is important that we note the wonderful work that has been done in preparing for this particular investment and the detailed work that has been undertaken. There are rare times in public policy where the evidence drives the response, and this is one of those times where there is really comprehensive work undertaken. I would like to commend the minister, and the former minister in fact, for the work that has been undertaken in that area. In terms of my local community I would like to touch upon a couple of investments that were made in the budget. One is the investment in Newlands Primary School. There is just under $12 million, from memory, invested in the school. And I would like to commend the community there, because if you went back a generation this was a school on the brink, really, of whether it would exist. The principal, Ross Dudgeon, and also the community out there—and I personally know a number of the people who have served on the school committee—have dedicated themselves. It is a wonderful school that has a great selling point: it is a Spanish bilingual school with a particularly strong focus and wonderful academic performance. And it is also a community school embedded in the community there. You attend community festivals in many places as a member of Parliament, but the Newlands Primary School has a particular vibrancy, and it is a school now with growing enrolments. The investment in this school will allow the facilities to match the wonderful work being undertaken by the teachers, by the families and by the children there and the leadership that has been shown at a principal and school council level over many years. I have great confidence. I will declare a small conflict of interest insofar as my nephew attends the school, but I have to say that it is a wonderful school dedicated to its community and producing fantastic results. Coming off a period where there were real questions about the future for the school, it is a very difficult thing for a school community and school leadership to deal with the issue where there are declining enrolments. The perception—in this case not necessarily correctly—develops that it is not the school to send your kids to compared

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2613 with some of the other surrounding schools. It has turned that situation around and created a circumstance where it really is a school with a bright future, and this investment reflects the wonderful work that is being done at the school and the wonderful future that I believe Newlands Primary School will have. The other thing I want to touch upon—and it is an investment that, compared with a number of other investments that are taking place in my own electorate in transport infrastructure, is a relatively small amount of money, but I think it is really important—is the upgrades to safety, security and the lighting around Ruthven station. This is a part of my community in the northern part of Reservoir. It is a station between Reservoir and Keon Park stations, where the station had not been invested in for a significant period of time and where people in the community had raised with both me and the federal member of Parliament Ged Kearney the safety at that particular location. It is a good example of how I would encourage both members of my community and in fact the whole of Victorian society when they have a problem to raise it and when they see an issue of safety or security or amenity in an area to please come forward, because there is nothing, as a local member, more satisfying than being able to successfully advocate for the people you represent. In this case I was, along with others, including the federal member, able to advocate and see an investment. It is not comparable to the level crossings— I will not touch upon the wonderful investments in level crossings that are going on in my electorate in the limited time—but this is a good example of where there was a specific issue that directly affected the community and how a relatively modest investment that was made within my own community will change the sense of safety and security for people in my own community in such a way that will allow the use of that railway station in a way that will be important to the particular people who live in that catchment. I would also like to touch upon a couple of areas. I note the Minister for Planning and Minister for Housing was present. I have had some discussions with him, and also the minister with responsibility for jobs, Minister Pulford in the other place, and also the minister for community services, the member for Narre Warren North. There are a couple of investments. One is in relation to jobs. There have been investments in employment in this budget that have been funded, which are titled ‘Getting Victorians back to work: our plan to minimise the risk and costs of greater inequality’. I think about the dedication and work that is being undertaken currently, particularly in those portfolios, and there is another investment in relation to community services that I will touch upon. You have ministers—and I have certainly advocated to those ministers in relation to those issues—who are really dedicated. These are relatively overlooked sometimes in the broad discussion of the budget, but they are specific investments to deal with inequality, to deal with the distribution of employment—in this case the Minister for Employment’s area of responsibilities—looking at entrenched inequality and in effect inverting the gaze of government. So instead of looking from above at the series of services that government delivers, we are looking at communities—and I know there is an investment in the area of community services in the Shepparton community—and looking at how we can deal with entrenched inequality. There is also an investment in the Brimbank community as well as pilots. How do we bring together a service delivery which looks at the individual circumstances of families who are disadvantaged, looks at the lives that they are living and brings really a different approach, where people are working across areas of state government service delivery? We are looking at a pilot where we as a society are looking at how we can change the course of those lives and how we can ensure that the services that are offered change the trajectory of disadvantaged Victorians so that they have employment, so they are able to live lives with their children, take advantage of the opportunities that we take for granted often in our community, and whereby we can actually change the lives of people who have not been forgotten by this government. But in fact we are looking now to how we can tailor services to meet their individual needs, which I think is an important development and one for which I would commend the work that has been done by a number of ministers, because these investments may not get the headlines but they will change lives. There is a determination to ensure that we deal with inequality and that we look, as we come through the period of the pandemic, which

MOTIONS 2614 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 in many ways accelerates change and highlights social issues, to deal with inequality. I commend the budget to the house. This is a budget that makes the right investments and helps people. Ms BLANDTHORN (Pascoe Vale) (18:46): It is with great pleasure that I too finally rise to make a contribution in particular to the 2021–22 Andrews Labor government budget. But I also note that I did not actually have a chance to speak in relation to the 2020–21 budget, in which there were also many great wins for my community. Can I firstly commend the Treasurer and the Department of Treasury and Finance for effectively bringing down two budgets in seven, eight months. This was, as members of the committee I chair, the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee, know full well, certainly a mammoth effort for the whole of government both at a ministerial and at an executive level but also for those thousands of bureaucrats that work on our budgets right across the state. This budget certainly outlines the settings that will continue to respond to the pandemic. They set us up and got us through some of the worst moments that this state has seen so far during this pandemic, but they also set the parameters, I guess, for us going forward and allow us both to continue to service the people we represent but also put in place the policy settings that will help us recover from this one- in-100-year pandemic. Indeed at the time I first made notes to speak on this motion, much of the life that we cherish here in Victoria, certainly in my electorate of Pascoe Vale and across the state more broadly, was returning to normal. People were flocking back to cafes and restaurants, families were celebrating milestones with each other, families were attending their kids’ sporting events and people were indeed venturing to our regions to visit their favourite tourist destinations. I myself was pleased to go with my family to Sovereign Hill, to the wildlife park up in Ballarat and across Daylesford and Castlemaine to catch up with family members that I had not seen at that time certainly for almost a year in some cases. But indeed we know that we are also back in different settings, and that is what this budget is about: being able to respond to and represent and provide for those most vulnerable members of the community in these difficult times that are, as we know, ebbing and flowing. The government’s November budget was what this state needed at the time to get us through what was the worst period so far for our state in the COVID-19 pandemic, and certainly the budget that we saw this year was what is going to take us forward. But this is, as we all know, an evolving environment, and while we are in a better place than we may have imagined a year ago, that is not to say that things can be taken for granted and that we can rest on our laurels. There is still indeed much to do in Victoria. The numbers detailed in Victoria’s economy tell a positive story about the government’s economic management in the immediate aftermath of the experiences we had last year. Victoria is on track to help hundreds of thousands of people back into work, and in fact the interim goal of 200 000 additional jobs was reached almost a year early. This has directly benefited many of those who were most disadvantaged through some of the worst moments of the pandemic last year. We know that women not only suffered the harshest job losses in 2020 but were often on the front line of providing essential services, whether that be in our healthcare sector, in our retail sector or in other essential services and vital supply chains. It is extremely important that as part of any economic recovery female employment is protected, supported and encouraged, and it is important to note that it has surged recently and is above the prepandemic levels that we saw last year. We do note unfortunately that some wage increases, however, were delayed by the Fair Work Commission at the time for some of those in some of those essential services, such as retail. There has been a similar outcome for young people. They were also hit hard by the circumstances of our time, and they are often the first ones to be let go in employment situations. So again, it is very welcome that the proportion of workers under 30 in jobs has also shown a recovery and is returning to prepandemic levels. Indeed overall Victorian workforce participation was at a record high—a remarkable achievement given all that the state has been through and continues to go through. It is true that there were some tough decisions made with this budget and indeed with the budget prior, but these reflect the government’s commitment to responding to the needs of all Victorians across the whole of our state, including the most vulnerable.

MOTIONS Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2615

It is certainly a budget that is for the common good. As our state continues to grow in fact state final demand has grown by 6.8 per cent—at the time, more than double the national average. These are not just sterile numbers on a spreadsheet; they speak to an improvement of the economic security and wellbeing of many thousands of individuals and families. But as I said, people cannot rest on their laurels; there is more that this government has to do to lay out a responsible fiscal plan that will create jobs, reduce unemployment and restore economic growth in these ever-changing conditions, return to an operating cash surplus, return to operating surpluses and stabilise debt levels. As I indicated earlier, step one of this plan is largely underway, and this budget is about locking in step two. But importantly, as a Labor government, this is a budget that is about statewide reform. It is about reform in education, it is about reform in the housing area, it is about reform in relation to mental health and it is about reform in relation to energy. One of the areas that I have been most passionate about since I was elected as the member for Pascoe Vale and have had the privilege of serving my great community has been education, and the Victorian budget for 2021–22 invests $400.7 million to deliver our nation-leading three-year-old kindergarten rollout and to build and upgrade early learning facilities, ensuring our must vulnerable children remain supported as we recover from the pandemic. As someone who recently—just yesterday in fact—enrolled their own little girl in three-year-old kinder, I know how important this is. This funding also includes $167.1 million to support the rollout of our landmark three-year-old kindergarten reform. I know from the families that are using it and that are anticipating using it next year that the three-year-old kinder in our service is a really welcome investment that is well received by the community as a whole. This budget is also about ensuring a bright future for our kids in schools. The Victorian budget invests $1.6 billion to build new schools and improve existing schools, making sure that our kids have the bright futures they deserve and building on the $3 billion delivered in last year’s budget. With $1.6 billion in schools on top of the $3 billion last year, this really is transformational. I know in my own community across the two budgets—as I said, I did not have the opportunity to speak on the November budget—Glenroy West Primary School was allocated $18.12 million. This is perhaps one of the greatest investments and one of the ones I am most proud of in my community. Glenroy West Primary School has an extremely hardworking community which has fought extremely hard for this funding for many, many, many years—certainly in all the time since I have been elected. They are a school that really are fierce advocates—their parents, their teachers and certainly their principal, Pam Streete—for the educational opportunities of the students who go there. They are the only school in the area which offers International Baccalaureate education as well. $18.12 million effectively builds a new school for the students of Glenroy West Primary School. I know they are extremely excited about this. We were all excited to see the new designs recently, and I cannot wait to continue to work through this project with them. It also includes $750 000 for the Glenroy Central Primary School, and this is to improve the school’s oval. Being the area we are, there is one of the largest volcanic rock formations in the world across the Glenroy-Coburg area. Their school oval literally had rock jutting up out of the surface. To be able to upgrade this facility so that the students at Glenroy Central Primary School have a surface that they can play sport on has certainly been welcomed most of all by the students at the school. There is $7.87 million to deliver the next stage of the school’s master plan at the Pascoe Vale Primary School—again, a beautiful school community where the parents and students and the teaching and leadership staff worked so hard to bring these plans to life. There is a further $1.23 million for the Pascoe Vale South Primary School, which is about the continuation of their redevelopment. And I will note the member for Preston made comments in relation to the Newlands Primary School, which is actually on our Elizabeth Street border; Coburg North is on one side of the road, Newlands is on the other. It is a community that the member for Preston and I know very well, and again they have worked very hard for that funding.

MOTIONS 2616 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021

Again, one that I am particularly proud of is the Coburg Special Developmental School— $22.59 million to build a new Coburg Special Developmental School. The Coburg Special Developmental School is at present a little school made up almost entirely of portable buildings—if not entirely of portable buildings—on Gaffney Street in Coburg, and to think that we will transform that into a school that is really fit for purpose and modern and worthy and will provide for the students an education that ensures their dignity as people at the same time is really just amazing. The toilet facilities, the showers, the lack of accessibility for what is effectively a special developmental school at the current point in time is really quite shameful, and this $22.59 million will build a brand new, beautiful school for this community. Finally, for the Pascoe Vale Girls College there is nearly $12 million, which will deliver the next stage of the school’s master plan, including a new arts and technology centre. This is on top of the money that they were previously provided for stage 1, which included the new food technology spaces as well as upgrading the hall and production spaces. This school and their principal, Kay Peddle, do amazing work in terms of fostering all elements of the girls’ education at Pascoe Vale Girls College, from their arts and musical interests to STEM and trade professions. They do an amazing job, and to be able to provide nearly $12 million for the second stage of this redevelopment is also a great win for this community. I commend all of the principals in my local community, who fight so hard for each and every one of their school communities, and over time I have been pleased to work with all of them for improvements at their schools. But this budget is not just about bricks and mortar, as important as they are. The budget also enables the continuation of a number of important programs that support and enhance quality of life for students and their families, and in particular this budget includes further support for the accessible buildings program, with $15 million provided to improve access to school facilities for students with disabilities and additional needs. The accessible buildings program supports a wide range of facility modifications, including providing ramps and handrails, alterations to toilet and shower facilities and adjustments that provide greater access for students with vision or hearing impairments. I know from talking to parents and students that this program means so much to so many families in my electorate. I also just want to mention the Doctors in Secondary Schools program. This is another program that benefits many families in my electorate. Students in secondary schools participating in this program will have access to primary health care in schools, and this is so important, in particular for so many of the multicultural families that live and are educated in my community. I am fast running out of time. There is indeed so much to cover, but I also just wanted to mention the Big Build. Victoria is undergoing obviously a once-in-a-generation transformation that is adding much-needed infrastructure across the state, and the budget sees more than $144 billion of capital projects that are either commencing or already underway. The workers on these projects and the thousands of workers in supply chains indirectly benefiting from these projects are fuelling not just a much-needed improvement to our state’s infrastructure but are also adding to our economic recovery. Pascoe Vale in particular will benefit from our government’s huge investment in transport infrastructure, including tram stop accessibility, amenity and safety and the 25 new X’Trapolis 2.0 trains. The new trains will be delivered along with upgrades to the Craigieburn train maintenance facility. And it would be remiss not to mention the level crossing removal projects. Four level crossings have disappeared on the Upfield line from Moreland Road to Bell Street in Coburg, and we are looking forward to very soon being able to open up the nearly two MCGs worth of open space that is underneath the new elevated rail. The stations have been extremely well received. They are just amazing examples of the types of projects that can happen with this type of investment. Business interrupted under sessional orders.

ADJOURNMENT Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2617

Adjournment The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is:

That the house now adjourns.

CAULFIELD ELECTORATE SAFETY Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (19:00): (5951) My adjournment is for the Minister for Crime Prevention, and the action that I seek is for the minister to provide funding for CCTV and lighting for our Elsternwick village shopping precinct. Could I put on record just the great amount of work that all of our traders right across certainly my electorate and others in this Parliament have done during very, very difficult times. To keep the doors open is really hard during this period with the uncertainty that we have all had. With lockdown number 5 it has been really tough for many of those traders. I met with the Elsternwick Mainstreet Committee just last week—Aaron Agisilaou; Geoff Szwarcbard from the Guardian Pharmacy; and Evan Crabtree from Crabtree & Weeks, who runs a fantastic nursery. They met with me with the idea of providing CCTV and lighting to deal with a number of crime prevention issues. We have three car parks in the Elsternwick precinct, all poorly lit. Issues of dumping of rubbish— Mr T Bull: It’s a no-brainer. Mr SOUTHWICK: Correct. This is a no-brainer, as my colleague says. Graffiti issues, dumping of rubbish, safety issues of people walking back of a night to their car park, antisocial behaviour, bashings—there are a lot of issues that could be certainly solved if we had some activated lighting, better lighting and CCTV. I know a number of other electorates have had this. This would be a great opportunity for my constituents of Elsternwick to feel safe and for the shopping precinct to be more welcoming and certainly more accessible. I know different councils have ways of dealing with this. Certainly the City of Glen Eira believe it is a state responsibility to look after this, so they are not looking at potentially monitoring the CCTV. That will be a separate discussion that we will have with Victoria Police and/or the traders who are willing to actually do the monitoring of the CCTV. But can I say there are others—the City of Port Phillip have an arrangement. So each council treats it differently. But ultimately we want the state government to put their hand in their pocket for something that is really, really important right now to my constituents of Elsternwick to ensure we have a safe neighbourhood, a safe shopping precinct— one that is welcoming, one that certainly is appealing particularly for those traders that are doing it really tough in very uncertain times. BUS ROUTE 626 Mr STAIKOS (Bentleigh) (19:02): (5952) My adjournment matter tonight is for the attention of the Minister for Public Transport and concerns one of his favourite topics of discussion, and that is buses. The action that I seek from the minister is that he ensures that the 626 bus is redirected to the new McKinnon Secondary College east campus during school start and finish times. Now, it goes without saying that I am very, very proud of the Andrews Labor government’s investment in this new campus of McKinnon Secondary College, and equally I am proud of the role that I have played as the local member to get that project done. The construction of the new campus is roaring ahead. It will be open in time for the 2022 school year. But it is not just about constructing the campus; it is also about making sure that it is accessible to local students. Currently that site is serviced by the 630 bus route, which travels up and down North Road, as well as the 627 bus, which we introduced back in 2019 after a long period of community consultation, and that travels up and down East Boundary Road. But I also think that the 626 needs to service the new campus, because the 626 travels right through the current McKinnon Secondary College zone. In fact it stops right outside McKinnon Secondary College’s main campus. And this would be a modest redirection. It would only be at school start and finish times. We would not have to install any new bus stops, because it would use the existing

ADJOURNMENT 2618 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 bus stops for the 627 bus. It would drop the students off at East Boundary Road. There will be a new signalised pedestrian crossing at South Drive. Therefore the students will have a short and safe walk from the bus to school. I think it makes a lot of sense, and I thank the minister in anticipation of his careful consideration of this important issue. PRINCES HIGHWAY EAST Mr T BULL (Gippsland East) (19:05): (5953) My adjournment tonight is to the Minister for Roads and Road Safety. The action I am seeking is for the minister to address the current dangerous situation around narrow shoulders on the Princes Highway between Stratford and Bairnsdale. And in asking this I first of all want to thank the minister for coming down to my electorate and travelling this road, for contacting me to say he was going to do it and for being in communication with me on that day. Unfortunately I was interstate and I could not join him, but I am pleased that he came down. As the minister saw on that day, the shoulders are so narrow that big trucks cannot get off the road— they are hard up against the barrier if they break down and the mirror and part of the door are actually on the carriageway. If people in a car break down and they have got to change a tyre on the right-hand side, they have got their legs and their backside in the carriageway. It is exceptionally unsafe on a road that is prone to fog. I see the minister nodding his head, and I think we would be in agreement on that one, Minister. The minister wrote to me after his visit and he said that he can appreciate the concerns, which is fantastic. I know he is relatively new to the portfolio, but he is the first roads minister who has told me he can appreciate these concerns. So what we want to do now is find out what we can do to address these concerns, and it is going to take the widening of the shoulders. Now, this road barrier program in my patch, I have no doubt that it does stop head-on collisions— when you put a wall down the middle of the road of course you are going to stop head-on collisions. But you have got to stop the other problems that occur, and this has been a litany of disasters. We have had barriers pulled out within weeks of them going in because they destroyed the line of sight, we have had roads that have fallen to bits and needed to be resealed in a short amount of time and the government changed its program to put in pull-over areas that were not originally in the design after requests. Local police, ambos and other emergency services workers have expressed these concerns about these narrow shoulders, and I encourage the minister—now that he has travelled the road, observed the problem and agreed there is a problem there—to work with me and work with the local community on a plan to fix the issue. BORONIA TRAIN STATION Mr TAYLOR (Bayswater) (19:07): (5954) I wish to raise a matter with the Minister for Public Transport. The action that I seek is the minister join me at Boronia station to view firsthand the issues the community have raised with me about the station since my being elected. Boronia is a great place to live, to work, to raise a family and so much more. It is truly one of the best spots in Melbourne. And of course since day one I have been fighting tooth and nail to get things done and to see change in Boronia, to see it live up to the dreams and aspirations the community has for it. Since being elected to represent Boronia locals in Parliament I have heard them loud and clear. They want to see our suburb live up to the potential that it has. I am so very proud that in the Andrews Labor government we have not sat on our hands. Instead we have got things done in Boronia, with nearly $3 million of direct investment into the CBD thanks to the Boronia revitalisation program and the revitalisation board, which I am very proud to chair. Over $2 million of that has been announced and will go towards delivering much-needed projects and upgrades to get Boronia moving. Some of those projects include $800 000 for the new-look Erica Avenue in the form of a streetscape renewal as per stage 1 works; $80 000 for the Boronia Big Flix Festival; $150 000 for the business facade grant program to help spruce up shopfronts and bring life to our boulevards; $200 000 for a range of pop- up events to activate Boronia like you have never seen; $250 000 invested to upgrade the laneway along the station and for bright, lit-up public art; $100 000 to replace 478 inefficient lights across the CBD and install better and brighter ones, making it safer too; $150 000 to help beautify Boronia with

ADJOURNMENT Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2619 the creation of three large-scale mural sites in the CBD; and much more with announcements on that soon. I could go on. But our community knows that to see Boronia continue to thrive, to have better perceptions of safety and to make it easier to get around we have got to look at fixing the station. Built in 1998 and not really touched since then, it is clear the original design elements of the station simply do not stack up in a 21st-century Boronia neighbourhood, and we have got to seriously think about how we make it better for the community. This is about making Boronia a better place to live, a better place to work and a better place to play in and to raise a family. And this of course is about creating jobs, breathing life into our vibrant community and getting on with getting things done in Boronia. Our community deserves nothing less. I thank the minister for his consideration of my request, and I look forward to welcoming him to beautiful Boronia. I am very grateful for the time that he has given me and for listening to the needs of Boronia locals and the needs that we have at the station. KUNYUNG ROAD, MOUNT ELIZA, LAND REZONING Mr MORRIS (Mornington) (19:10): (5955) I raise a matter for the Minister for Planning, and I am delighted to see he is in the chair opposite. Now, the matter I raise relates to a site outside the urban growth boundary, at 60–70 Kunyung Road, Mount Eliza, and the action I am seeking from the minister is that he immediately proceed to conduct a ministerial rezoning of the site to rezone the land to green wedge. This government brags a lot about protecting the green wedge. We have had lots of words. It is about time those words were put into actions, and we have seen precious little in the way of actions on this site. On 19 February last year, in the house, I asked the minister to expedite the approval of the exhibition of amendment C270. The minister responded in the chamber. He said he would look out for it. Nothing happened. On 4 June 2020 I asked the minister to call in an inappropriate development and reject it, and by inappropriate—remember we are talking outside the urban growth boundary, surrounded by green wedge—I mean a development of 23 000 square metres, eight four-storey buildings, three three- storey buildings, 272 apartments in total, 115 nursing beds and 362 car spaces, all outside the urban growth boundary. Again the minister refused. The council rejected the application, and of course the proponent appealed. On 14 October I asked the minister again to call it in and reject it, and again he refused to do that. In his footnote he said that there was an amendment—I do not think he actually said C270, but that is clearly what he was referring to—that was under consideration and that he would make a decision in due course. We are still waiting. The minister has had this rezoning request on his desk for 17 months. Mr Wynne: On my desk? Mr MORRIS: On your desk. This rezoning is supported by an overwhelming majority of the community. It is supported by an overwhelming majority of the new council as well. Let us see if this minister is actually fair dinkum, if all the words that we have heard about protecting the green wedge— and we have seen zero actions in Mount Eliza—are fair dinkum or not, because so far the minister has refused on three occasions to take action to protect this land, which is outside the urban growth boundary. He has got an opportunity now to make up for those three strikes, and I do ask him to act and act as expeditiously as possible to finally protect this land. PASCOE VALE ELECTORATE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION FACILITIES Ms BLANDTHORN (Pascoe Vale) (19:12): (5956) I appreciate the opportunity to raise a matter for the attention of the Minister for Early Childhood in the other place, and the action I seek is that the minister provide me with an update on the current Andrews Labor government building projects at Will Will Rook Preschool, York Street Kindergarten at Glenroy West Primary School and the Glenroy Hub Early Years Centre. These are all very important and much-welcomed projects for our Glenroy community that will deliver modern facilities for our early years and meet the expanded needs of our

ADJOURNMENT 2620 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 universal three-year-old kinder agenda, a program that will see all Victorian kids have access to the best start to their educational journey and a solid foundation to thrive at school. Glenroy is home to many young families, many of whom have recently moved to the area, and our investment in educational infrastructure in and around the area has prepared for and responded to this growth. Our government has delivered massive investments in local Glenroy primary and secondary schools, with the $18.12 million rebuild of the Glenroy West Primary School and the $9.215 million upgrade at Glenroy College. I have been so proud to see significant investment in early childhood facilities in the Glenroy area, including $1.6 million for a new integrated children’s centre at the Glenroy hub, $1.195 million for a new modular building at York Street Kindergarten at Glenroy West Primary School and $1.577 million for an expansion at Will Will Rook Preschool. The three early childhood projects we have announced in Glenroy form a key part of over $100 million in Andrews Labor government funding towards kinder and school infrastructure in and around the Pascoe Vale electorate over our time in government. Just a few months ago I was pleased to have the opportunity to invite the minister out to the Glenroy hub to see the hive of activity underway and to see this new integrated children’s centre taking shape alongside new maternal and child health services and a library service. Along with this project, I am keen to report back to my community on the progress of our other Glenroy kinder upgrades, which I know the providers, along with current and future students, are very excited to see open and operational. FLOOD PLAIN HARVESTING Ms SHEED (Shepparton) (19:14): (5957) My adjournment is for the acting Minister for Water, and the action I seek is that he make a submission on behalf of the Victorian government to the inquiry into flood plain harvesting being conducted by a select committee of the Legislative Council of the New South Wales Parliament. Submissions for this inquiry close on 13 August 2021. I have raised with the minister on several occasions my great concerns about flood plain harvesting in northern New South Wales and southern Queensland. Earlier this year I and other stakeholders from my region travelled up the Darling River into southern Queensland and across to Moree looking at the proliferation of dams that have been built on private land, all in breach of the cap agreement in the Murray-Darling Basin plan that was put in place in 1995. It is truly astounding to see. The flows in the Darling River and the lack thereof have an impact on Victoria and the Goulburn-Murray irrigation district, which is in my electorate. The Darling River contributes to the downstream flows of the Murray-Darling Basin, and this contribution is enhanced by the Menindee Lakes. The current basin agreement means that the Victorian and New South Wales systems are obliged to meet the minimum flows and dilution flows across the South Australian border each year and provide South Australia with their share. If the Darling does not flow in any season, then the shortfall has to be made up by Victoria and southern New South Wales from the Murray. So a failure to supply from the Darling River in any year directly and adversely impacts the Victorian and New South Wales Murray allocations. This has been occurring with increased regularity. Canada’s largest state-owned pension fund has now acquired more than $4 billion worth of Australian farms and irrigation water, and some of these assets are located in the northern basin, where they enjoy the current benefits of unregulated flood plain harvesting as well as their purchased entitlements. These investors do not care about the state of our environment or about our rivers. The facilitation of foreign ownership of water of this magnitude is truly staggering. The corporatisation of land and water in our local communities is having a dramatic effect on the socio-economic wellbeing of these communities. The New South Wales government has only recently introduced regulations to its Parliament to effectively legitimise this flood plain harvesting, and the upper house of the Parliament has disallowed those amendments on several occasions and appointed this inquiry to look into the matter. The Victorian government knows the damage that has been done to the Darling River by flood plain harvesting in the north, and I call on the government to— (Time expired)

ADJOURNMENT Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2621

ESTORE LOGISTICS Ms CONNOLLY (Tarneit) (19:17): (5958) My adjournment is for the Minister for Employment, Minister for Small Business and Minister for Innovation, Medical Research and the Digital Economy in the other place. The action I seek is that the minister join me for a visit to eStore Logistics out in Truganina. The Tarneit electorate I represent is more than just housing estates. We are home to a growing industrial hub in Truganina and in Laverton North, with lots of businesses setting up shops and warehouses in the electorate. Now, one of these fantastic businesses is eStore Logistics, who operates as a third-party logistics provider for online retailers, with a focus on warehousing and order fulfilment. It is fair to say that it has been a really tough time for small businesses over the past 12 months, and online shopping and services like those provided by eStore would no doubt have been considered a saving grace for many. Most recently they were fortunate to receive a $50 000 grant from our government’s technology adoption and innovation program, and I had the pleasure of meeting with eStore’s founder and managing director, Leigh Williams. I know that Leigh and the team at eStore would love to have the minister stop by and see the great work that this grant is helping them achieve. RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES REGULATIONS 2021 Mr ANGUS (Forest Hill) (19:19): (5959) I raise a matter of importance for the attention of the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation. The action I seek is for the minister to meet with me and experts from the electrical industry and the real estate industry to resolve the numerous important outstanding issues that have arisen following the commencement of the Residential Tenancies Regulations 2021 earlier this year. In particular the issue of the electrical and gas safety checks has raised a lot of concern. That concern varies from the costs of these checks and the implication of these costs for both the landlord and the tenant through to the technical standards surrounding the electrical safety regime. In particular local resident Kevin met with me in my office earlier this year and raised a raft of concerns regarding the electrical safety check. Kevin advised me that he is a degree-qualified electrical engineer with over 40 years professional experience. He has undertaken a very detailed piece of work reviewing the requirements of the new Residential Tenancies Act 1997 regulations, including reviewing the Australia and New Zealand standard AS/NZS 3019, which is referred to in the regulations. His conclusion is that in relation to the electrical safety matters they ‘suffer from unclear and ambiguous treatment in AS 3019’. He addressed a range of other matters also and advised me that he has written to the minister many times about his concerns but unfortunately he has not received a response. The cost of these recent changes will inevitably be passed on by the landlords to the tenants, resulting in less affordable housing for tenants. Additionally I have already been contacted by several landlords advising me that they will be selling their investment property, thus potentially reducing rental stock in the market. Minister, the outworking of these new regulations and requirements has the real potential to result in a range of perverse and unforeseen outcomes. Consequently I look forward to meeting with the minister and others with a view to hearing from experts in the field and assisting both landlords and tenants to navigate these recent changes as soon as possible and having a sensible outcome. CREATIVE INDUSTRIES SECTOR Mr McGUIRE (Broadmeadows) (19:21): (5960) My adjournment request is for the Minister for Creative Industries. The action I seek is for the minister to provide an update on how the Andrews government’s four-year creative industries strategy can be harnessed for Victoria first and foremost but absolutely for the people of Broadmeadows. The reason is that Creative State 2025 is creating opportunities and stimulating growth for the creative workers, businesses and industries at a time of upheaval, and importantly this new strategy is backed by an unprecedented $288 million. That is important because this sector is worth more than $30 billion and it is a catalyst for the state’s future economic prosperity and social wellbeing. I am right behind this as the chair of the Broadmeadows Revitalisation Board 4.0. We have had some real interest locally on how we harness this and make

ADJOURNMENT 2622 Legislative Assembly Tuesday, 3 August 2021 this work. This could be in the media sector for film and television. They are being put through to the minister for due diligence as is appropriate. While I have got the opportunity with the Minister for Housing being at the table, the question has been put: is he fair dinkum? Well, it would be remiss of me not to acknowledge the minister. He came to Broadmeadows recently and provided affordable accommodation, training and jobs for youth at risk in a $7.4 million investment with Kangan Education First Youth Foyer in Broadmeadows. Now, this is important because these are at-risk kids; they do not get much of a chance. This was really important. Then it leverages the unprecedented $5.3 billion investment for social and affordable housing. That is $5.3 billion—I think that is called fair dinkum. I think that is of note. This is how we are trying to harness the new industries and jobs. We want that, with the advanced manufacturing, the housing, the opportunity—how you connect the disconnected so they actually get a chance. We have got $60 million for TAFE, which is critical—for the Minister for Training and Skills in the other place—to how you can bring back these communities. This is the investment. Then we will come to the creative on top as well, because talent is not defined by demographics but too often opportunity is. This is what this government is about, and giving people a better opportunity in life. RESPONSES Mr WYNNE (Richmond—Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing) (19:24): It is a very big evening out for me. I am delighted to be responding to these excellent adjournments this evening. I do not normally do a Tuesday. I do not know what has gone on, but you will have me tomorrow as well. The member for Caulfield raised a matter for the Minister for Crime Prevention seeking the minister’s financial support and commitment to CCTV in the Elsternwick shopping centre, and I will make sure the minister is aware of that. The member for Bentleigh raised a matter for the Minister for Public Transport seeking a redirection of the 626 bus only for the morning and afternoon drop-off and pick-up times for the wonderful McKinnon secondary school—a beautiful school. I think that is an excellent proposition. I will make sure the minister is aware of that. The member for Gippsland East raised a matter for the Minister for Roads and Road Safety in relation to the Stratford to Bairnsdale section of the Princes Highway as it relates to what he asserts to be the narrowing of the shoulders of the road, which he submits is very, very dangerous, particularly if there is a breakdown of vehicles on that narrow section of road. The member for Bayswater raised a matter for the Minister for Public Transport seeking that the minister visit the Boronia station precinct to get a briefing on the $3 million revitalisation of that precinct, and I am sure the minister would be delighted to hear of the excellent work that the member has done as the chair of that committee. The member for Mornington—well, there you are—has raised a matter with me in relation to a development. It is the Ryman development in his electorate. I am quite familiar with this development. It has been an issue of foment in that community for a very long time. I think the member knows me well enough to know that my commitment to community and to planning and good process is well known in this place. I can give him this assurance: before the end of this week one of my senior planning advisers you will have the pleasure of meeting with, and he or she—they are all excellent people—will provide you with a full briefing on where that development is up to and likely time lines for decision-making. That will happen this week. The member for Pascoe Vale raised a matter for the Minister for Early Childhood seeking a meeting to discuss the capital upgrade program which is occurring in the Glenroy precinct in relation to our wonderful commitment in relation to childcare facilities, and I am sure the minister would be delighted to hear further on those developments.

ADJOURNMENT Tuesday, 3 August 2021 Legislative Assembly 2623

The member for Shepparton raised a matter for me as the acting Minister for Water. I think it is incumbent upon me to indicate to the house, as I have done before, that I had the pleasure of having an excellent conversation with the Minister for Water over the weekend, which was terrific. She is making very good progress—steady and good progress—from what has been quite a challenging issue for her, and I know absolutely that she will be returning to her post in the next couple of weeks. Yes, the next two to three weeks is the goal, and I will be absolutely delighted. I am sure I speak on behalf of this Parliament of the standing that the minister has got in our community and particularly as this relates to her work in water, which I know the member for Shepparton knows intimately. I am well aware of the visit that the member for Shepparton did make through the Murray-Darling Basin there right up into New South Wales, where she briefed me on some of the practices, we will call them, of farming communities and others in that area and the investments—can I say, the opportunistic investments—that some have made in those precincts. I know that the Minister for Water has been very clear about her position in relation to foreign investment in those sorts of activities, but I can assure the member for Shepparton that we will be making a submission to the New South Wales upper house inquiry—the Council inquiry in New South Wales—in relation to flood plain harvesting. The position of the Victorian government remains immutable. We are completely, and have been consistently, opposed to flood plain harvesting, and that is our position. The member for Shepparton knows we continue our advocacy on behalf of ensuring that we get a decent outcome and a sustainable outcome when it comes to the Murray-Darling Basin, and particularly as it relates also to our traditional owner groups, who have got very modest proposals particularly up around the Mildura area for their aspirations in relation to access to water. I have called upon the federal minister, as you know—Minister Pitt. I think there is $40 million in the fund there. We would like to have at least a share of that so we can appropriately talk with our traditional owner groups about that. I thank you for your continued commitment to water issues in the area. The member for Tarneit has raised a matter for the Minister for Employment and Minister for Small Business seeking that the minister visit east or— Ms Connolly: eStore Logistics. Mr WYNNE: Someone has picked that up, hopefully—a very innovative logistics company in her area, and I am sure that the minister would be delighted to visit with the member for Tarneit. The member for Forest Hill raised a matter for the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation asking that the minister meet with representatives from the electrical and gas industries to understand what they put are difficulties with the residential tenancies amendments as they relate to both home owners and renters more generally, and I will make sure the minister is aware of that request. The member for Broadmeadows raised an interesting and discursive contribution there tonight in relation to his continued ambitions for his community in Broadmeadows. Whether it is around housing, whether it is around employment, whether it is around high-tech and indeed creative industries, it has to be a part of that package as well. We have got an excellent proposal in there which targets real opportunity for expansion of creative industries, and I know that the member for Broadmeadows will always be in that space of seeking out those opportunities for his community, and I thank him for his contribution as well. I will see you tomorrow night. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, Minister. The house now stands adjourned until tomorrow. House adjourned 7.31 pm.