Thursday, 14 October 2021

The SPEAKER (Hon. Colin Brooks) took the chair at 9.03 am and read the prayer.

Announcements

Acknowledgement of country

The SPEAKER (09:03): 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.

Business of the house

Notices of motion

The SPEAKER (09:04): I wish to advise the house that general business, notices of motion 7 to 14 and 33, will be removed from the notice paper unless members wishing their matter to remain advise the Clerk in writing before 1.00 pm today.

Documents

Inspector-general for emergency management

Inquiry into the 2019–20 Victorian Fire Season: Phase 2—Progress and Effectiveness of Victoria's Immediate Relief and Recovery Arrangements

Ms HUTCHINS (Sydenham—Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice, Minister for Victim Support) (09:04): I table, by leave, the inspector-general for emergency management’s Inquiry into the 2019–20 Victorian Fire Season: Phase 2—Progress and Effectiveness of Victoria’s Immediate Relief and Recovery Arrangements.

Documents

Incorporated list as follows:

DOCUMENTS TABLED UNDER ACTS OF PARLIAMENT—The Deputy Clerk tabled the following documents under Acts of Parliament:

National Parks Act 1975—Report 2020–21 on the working of the Act

National Parks Advisory Council—Report 2020–21

Public Record Office Victoria—Report 2020–21

Subordinate Legislation Act 1994—Documents under s 15 in relation to Statutory Rule 123.

Bills

Great Ocean Road and Environs Protection Amendment Bill 2021

Council’s amendments

The SPEAKER (09:05): I wish to advise the house that I have received a message from the Legislative Council agreeing to the Great Ocean Road and Environs Protection Amendment Bill 2021 with an amendment.

Ordered that amendment be taken into consideration later this day.

Committees

Parliamentary committees

Membership

The SPEAKER (09:06): The house should be aware that I have received the resignations of Mr Southwick from the Legal and Social Issues Standing Committee and Mr Gepp from the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee, both effective from 13 October 2021.

Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop) (09:06): I move, by leave:

That:

(1) Ms McLeish be a member of the Environment and Planning Standing Committee, and

(2) Mr Angus be a member of the Legal and Social Issues Standing Committee, and

(3) Ms Theophanous be a member of the Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee.

Motion agreed to.

Business of the house

Adjournment

Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop) (09:07): I move:

That:

(1) the house, at its rising, adjourns until Tuesday, 26 October 2021, or an earlier day and hour to be fixed by the Speaker;

(2) if, in the opinion of the Speaker, the date of the next scheduled sitting or a rescheduled sitting should be changed on the basis of health advice, the Speaker will consult with the Leader of the House and the Manager of Opposition Business to set a new day and hour to meet;

(3) the Speaker will notify members of any changes to the next sitting date.

Ms STALEY (Ripon) (09:07): We support the sitting of the house motion. We look forward in the period between this week and when we come back to some hopefully new arrangements on how we can sit, but we look forward to that date being the date we come back.

Motion agreed to.

COVID-19 vaccinations

Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop) (09:08): I move, by leave:

That:

(1) In order to protect the health and safety of members and parliamentary staff and reduce the risk of transmission of COVID-19, this house requires members of the Legislative Assembly attending the chamber or the parliamentary precinct to have received—

(a) their first COVID-19 vaccine dose by 15 October 2021, or have an appointment to receive their first dose between 15 October and 22 October 2021 and subsequently receive that dose by 22 October 2021; and

(b) their second COVID-19 vaccine dose by 26 November 2021.

(2) In order to protect the health and safety of electorate officers and community members, this house requires members of the Legislative Assembly attending their electorate offices to have received COVID-19 vaccinations as set out in paragraph (1).

(3) Members must provide proof of vaccination, proof of a vaccination booking or proof of a valid exception to the Clerk by the dates set out in paragraph (1).

(4) If any members do not meet the requirements set out in paragraph (3), the Clerk will—

(a) as soon as practicable, notify each member of the house which members have not met the requirements; and

(b) report the details to the house on the next sitting day.

(5) Unless otherwise ordered, any member who has not complied with the requirements set out in paragraph (3) is determined to have failed to comply with an order of the house and therefore—

(a) is suspended from attending the chamber and the parliamentary precinct until the second sitting day of the 2022 parliamentary year; and

(b) will have their parliamentary precinct security access pass revoked for the period of the suspension at the direction of the Clerk.

(6) If a member who is suspended under paragraph (5) provides proof of a first dose of vaccination between 15 October and 26 November 2021 or a second dose after 26 November 2021, or proof of a valid exception to the Clerk, their suspension is immediately lifted and the Clerk will advise members and the house accordingly.

(7) For the purposes of this resolution—

(a) COVID-19 vaccine means a vaccine to protect a person against SARSCoV-2 that, as at the date of this resolution, has been registered or provisionally registered by the Therapeutic Goods Administration or has been approved by a comparable overseas regulator, as determined by the Therapeutic Goods Administration under regulation 16DA(3) of the Therapeutic Goods Regulation 1990 of the commonwealth;

(b) proof of vaccination means information about a person’s vaccination status and includes a letter from a medical practitioner, a certificate of immunisation or an immunisation history statement obtained from the Australian immunisation register;

(c) proof of a valid exception means written certification from a medical practitioner that the person is unable, due to a medical contraindication to receive a dose or a further dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.

(8) The Clerk—

(a) must ensure all information provided under this resolution remains confidential and is stored securely;

(b) must not disclose any information except as authorised by this resolution; and

(c) must destroy all information provided under this resolution at the end of the session or an earlier time determined by the house.

(9) The house may agree to further resolutions to—

(a) vary or amend this resolution; or

(b) provide for arrangements for sittings in 2022 based on the epidemiology and progress in the road map to implementing the national plan at the time.

This is obviously a very important—you could say historic—motion that is being put to the house for their consideration over the course of today. The central purpose of this motion is to implement the requirement that was announced on 1 October, the requirement laid out by the chief health officer, that vaccinations be a requirement for all authorised workers in this state on the authorised workers list that is published to be vaccinated in order to attend work. The actual requirement is that authorised workers must have received at least their first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine by 15 October or provide evidence that they have an appointment to be vaccinated before 22 October and then ensure that they receive their first dose during that period to continue working on site. Authorised workers must be fully vaccinated by 26 November.

Now, we are moving this motion this sitting week. It has really been the first opportunity for the house to give effect to this motion this week, noting of course that today is 14 October and if this motion is passed by the house the arrangements will need to be in place and met by close of business tomorrow. We are also moving this motion, most importantly and significantly, because members of Parliament are not bound by the orders of the chief health officer whilst we are within the parliamentary precinct; however, as members of Parliament we are bound by resolutions of the house.

I do want to pause at this point and acknowledge the significant amount of work and advice of our clerks in this place and in the other place, but I would particularly like to acknowledge the work of our clerks in this place. There has been significant and very careful consideration that has gone into working through the most appropriate mechanism by which the Parliament, this chamber and the Legislative Council—obviously we are doing that separately in both chambers but together in both chambers—implements this requirement laid out by the chief health officer.

I would at this point acknowledge that that work, the advice from the clerks, has also gone on across the chamber and acknowledge those conversations and the constructive work we have been able to achieve with the opposition, the Greens and Independent members of Parliament. I have referred to the clerks in the other place, but we have also been working with our colleagues in the Legislative Council and, Speaker, the Presiding Officers as well in bringing us to this point. The culmination of that careful work, consideration and advice has resulted in both houses moving the same resolution on this matter, and I am advised that the Legislative Council will be considering their motion on this matter later today when their house meets following this house rising this afternoon.

Most importantly this motion gives effect to the requirements spelt out by the chief health officer, but it also, most importantly, ensures that members of Parliament are treated the same way as the rest of Victoria’s authorised workers. This is appropriate. Yes, as members of Parliament we are community leaders. We reflect the communities we represent, and it is terrific to see our communities responding so strongly to going out and heeding the call to get vaccinated—and I will talk a bit more about that in a moment—but also as members of Parliament we have a very public-facing role outside of this place. In our daily duties, in our electorates—and those of us who have the honour of holding different offices within this place—we interact with many people. When we can, there are functions to attend, there are schools to visit, there are community groups to catch up with, and our being vaccinated is not just protecting our own health and the health of everyone else in this place and in this precinct, it is also protecting the health of our community; we are protecting the community members that we engage with every single day.

In referring to the community in drafting this motion, careful consideration has also gone into how it reflects the circumstances our community is experiencing right now, over the course of 2020 and 2021, as a consequence of living during a time of a global pandemic. I say this because a motion that is moved to suspend a member of this place, a decision that is then voted on by their colleagues in this place, is a serious matter. It deserves grave attention because it is quite a significant penalty for a member of Parliament to pay for not complying with a motion. In recognising that each of us who comes to this place represents their individual communities, this motion also recognises that the individual choices we may make can impact on others—in this place, the staff, and as I have already referred to, members of the community that we interact with. That is why, after much discussion with the clerks and other members of Parliament, the motion does include this very serious and grave mechanism to suspend a member who does not comply with the requirements of the motion until the second sitting day of the 2022 parliamentary calendar year, a date I will come back to in a moment.

Now, historically, members have only been suspended from their duty as a member of Parliament in this place following a serious breach of privilege. It is a mechanism quite appropriately reserved for the most serious of breaches, and I took some further advice from the clerks over the course of yesterday to get a sense of how rarely a suspension mechanism has been deployed in this place. From advice from the clerks, I am advised that the mechanism that is available under standing order 126, which is that a member can be named as a consequence of misbehaviour in this place—so it is a misdemeanour that has to occur on the floor of the chamber—can then see the member be named and then suspended for a period of time.

That has only been used on 23 occasions in the last 20 years, plus the additional case with the then member for Frankston back in 2014, following a Privileges Committee report that found there was a breach of a code of conduct, which resulted in the naming and suspension of that member for a period of time. The advice from the clerks is that the last known example of a member being suspended that did not follow a naming under standing order 126 was in 1948, and in that case the member was suspended from the service of the house for insulting the Speaker—a very grave breach of privilege. He was suspended on 23 November by resolution and was excluded from the precinct until the year’s end. However, on 8 December, seven sitting days later, following an apology to the Speaker by the member, the suspension was rescinded by the house. I thought this was an important point to make because it does show both the rarity of this mechanism being used—a member being suspended—and also, too, the circumstances, in that it has to be a significant breach.

Given this, I do want to make it very clear that this motion that has been put to the house is to respond to these historic and challenging circumstances that we find ourselves in today. The wild, rapid and unfortunately ongoing spread of COVID-19 has triggered the global pandemic we have been living with since February–March of last year. It has required all of us—all of us—to adjust the way we live and work, and there have been adjustments that have not been easy for any of us. Telling family members that they cannot visit a loved relative in an aged-care facility is really hard, as is telling those hardworking men and women in Victoria that they cannot go to work. That is really hard. And these difficult decisions have been made to protect the health of our community. They have been made to stop and slow the spread of this deadly virus—and tragically, around the country, around the world, so many people have lost loved ones as a result of being infected with COVID-19—so today this motion I have moved on behalf of the government is asking this chamber, the Parliament, to make another one of those very difficult decisions.

What quickly followed the outbreak of the COVID-19 virus was the marvellous, incredible work of our scientific community, the global scientific and medical research community, who quickly put their best and brightest minds to developing vaccines that would give individuals and community that precious protection that a vaccine provides. As a result of this work Victorians are blessed to be able to access a vaccine that protects us against COVID-19. We have seen also how Victorians have responded marvellously to the call to get vaccinated. Our vaccination rates are rising every day. I think that the numbers for yesterday were at 60.9 per cent of Victorians who have received a second dose—so are double dosed. To drive this protection further the chief health officer has determined that authorised workers—a list that includes members of Parliament—are to be vaccinated. That is appropriate. Parliament is a workplace. Parliament is a workplace like all other workplaces and should be bound by the laws and rules of the day.

This motion makes Parliament consistent with other Victorian workplaces. This motion also counterbalances the rights of vaccinated members to be in their workplace safely with the rights of those few who refuse to share their vaccination status. It is also not just about members of Parliament. I know we often think it is about us. It is not. It is not just about members of Parliament. It is about protecting the others who work with us in this place—the chamber staff, the caterers, the cleaners and the security workers who work across the parliamentary precinct. They also deserve protection, and they deserve to know if the people they are working alongside are vaccinated.

I want to step through some further elements of the motion, starting with the parliamentary precinct and what is defined as the parliamentary precinct, so there is no ambiguity around the motion. The parliamentary precinct includes the parliamentary reserve—obviously, the parliamentary buildings and those beautiful gardens that our gardening staff look after so wonderfully. It is the parliamentary reserve, it is 55 St Andrews Place and it is level 1 at 157 Spring Street.

The motion also refers to electorate offices. I would like to make a specific mention of this, because whilst the advice again of the clerks is this motion cannot reach in, if you like, and have members of Parliament not attend their electorate offices we thought it was appropriate, after some discussion, that it be made very clear that it is the intent of the house that members also see the electorate offices as part of their place of work and if they are to attend their electorate offices they are also to meet those vaccination requirements. As I said, it is not an enforceable part of this motion, but it was felt appropriate that the house expresses its clear view on the status of electorate offices.

Again, our electorate staff are wonderful. I think across all parties, across all of the state our electorate officers have done a mighty job over the past two years, advising and supporting members of our community. I do not think it matters what political stripe you are, for members of Parliament our staff are the front line and the first source of advice that many in our community seek. Disappointingly and sadly, they have received too much abuse, insult and pressure from people who may not have agreed with the views of the day. I thank electorate staff right across the state for the work that they are doing, because they too serve their community on behalf of the members of Parliament that they work very hard for.

I go now to the proof-of-vaccination requirements in the motion. They are the same as I mentioned before. I read those requirements. I read the dates that are in the motion earlier. The proof requirements are to be provided to the Clerk, and the clerks are putting in place the mechanism for that information to be stored confidentially. The level of proof is the same for all other authorised workers in the state. I would also like to spend a moment on explaining what the intent behind the reference to the second sitting day of the 2022 parliamentary year is. Again, it was based on the very good advice from the Clerk that we needed to consider how the motion to suspend—members who do not comply with the motion are ultimately suspended—will not be seen as being without a time limit, because that would be seen as an expulsion, and that would be highly inappropriate in terms of the actions of this place. So that is why the decision has been taken to take this motion.

For members who do not comply with this motion, it carries through until the second sitting day of the 2022 parliamentary year to enable the house to once again deal with this issue, should this motion pass. I do not want to presuppose the successful passage of this motion, but I expect it will pass based on the conversations I have had with colleagues in this place. Should someone continue to not comply with this motion in early 2022 there is a mechanism by which this house can reconsider this issue with enough time to, if required, put in place a fresh motion to deal with members who have not complied by that time. Also of course the advice on what may happen in, most likely, early February 2022 will also be based on the epidemiology of the day and the requirements of the day outlined by the chief health officer.

Importantly too clause 6 of the motion very clearly outlines an immediate return for the member to come back to their duties in this place and on the parliamentary precinct should they comply with the requirements of this motion post 15 October and prior to that second sitting day in 2022. I would hope on that point that all members of Parliament can find a way to comply with this motion. As I said, we have put careful thought into how this house gives effect to those requirements from the chief health officer, and this motion is consistent with Victoria’s road map to deliver the national plan.

As I said, following the conclusion of this debate—and I am not presupposing the passage of this motion, but I think it can be expected, as I said—there will be further discussions over the next week, before the house returns on 26 October, as we have just moved through the sitting of the house motion. We will have discussions based on the members who have complied or otherwise with the motion, the advice and where we are with our vaccination rates as a state and can look at the opportunity for the house to hopefully return to a more normal functioning. Again, I cannot pre-empt what 26 October will look like. It will be based on a number of factors, including, as I said, the epidemiology of the day, the vaccination rates of the day and the vaccination rates of members, but I am flagging that that will be a feature of conversations between this sitting week and the next one.

But this motion is also consistent, as I have said, with the road map and the requirement for all industries to have their authorised workers vaccinated, and if we can get vaccinated, if we can hit those targets that are laid out not just here in Victoria but nationally, we can move along that path of going back to a workplace that operates in a more consistent way with what we have been used to in the past. But as we know, vaccination is the key. Vaccination is the key to opening up our economy. It is the key to being able to spend more time with families and friends, to getting our kids back to schools. Also, importantly, vaccination is the key to supporting our health system. We have to protect our health system as we open up as well. We have seen our nurses, our doctors, our ambos—all of our health workers—working their guts out day and night to treat people who are incredibly sick with COVID and treat everyone else who comes seeking important medical advice. They are doing their bit. They need us to do our bit, and that is also what is behind this motion.

It is important to note that every day the health update is provided to the Victorian community—the number of cases, the vaccination rates, the tests received, the vaccinations done on the previous day. There is also data on how people who are sick, who are very, very sick in ICU, mostly are not vaccinated, and that tells the story of how the vaccine can provide that precious protection for individuals but also for those health workers. We have heard those heartbreaking stories from nurses treating unvaccinated patients. I think it was Michelle, a nurse from the Royal Melbourne Hospital, who spoke a couple of Sundays ago at the press conference with pain and anguish about treating people who are very, very sick in ICU who have not been vaccinated and who are pleading to be vaccinated at the point that they are the sickest as a consequence of contracting COVID-19.

So that is another reason why this motion is so important. It speaks to those health workers. It says that we are doing our bit and we are recognising the work that they are doing because we will get vaccinated. Our work in here will continue. Meanwhile, just down the road at our various health institutions around the city and right across the state, their work does not stop. They will continue to have greater case numbers, greater numbers of people coming in seeking treatment, ambulances day and night working, travelling, ferrying people to and from hospital and giving them care in those ambulances while they are getting to hospital. This is a big responsibility that they carry, and that is why we have to make this very difficult decision in this place to support the work they are doing.

Getting vaccinated has never been more important. We know, as I said, it reduces the risk of us getting sick and it supports our families as well. It also supports those greater freedoms that all Victorians are looking forward to. In commending this motion to the house, I also would acknowledge and thank all members who can find a way to support this motion, because it is an important leadership position that we are taking individually and collectively in saying to the Victorian community, ‘As members of Parliament we are doing our bit too to help protect our community and help get our economy open’. I commend the motion to the house.

Ms STALEY (Ripon) (09:29): I rise to speak on the motion moved by the Leader of the House concerning COVID-19 vaccination requirements for members of the Assembly. The opposition will support this motion. I also would like to begin by thanking the clerks for their role in getting us to where we are now and the Speaker. There have been a series of conversations to get us to here. There are big issues that are raised by this motion, and we should not gloss over that, so I very much thank them as well and I thank the Leader of the House for her approach on this motion.

My remarks today are going to cover two areas—the rationale for our position on this motion and the constitutional considerations invoked by this motion. Eighty-eight Victorians have the great privilege to sit in this place on behalf of their constituents and communities, and with that privilege comes a responsibility to be leaders of our communities. In the COVID-19 pandemic the path out of lockdowns and restrictions is clearly vaccination. I am a strong supporter of all of those who can getting fully vaccinated. The opposition supports vaccination against COVID-19. Victorians have rolled up and continue to roll up their sleeves to get vaccinated.

As of yesterday 86.2 per cent of Victorians had received one dose and 60.4 per cent are fully vaccinated. We are on track to be one of the highest vaccinated places on the planet—a fact in which all Victorians should take great pride. We are pro-science, pro-health and pro-community, and by so strongly getting vaccinated we have emphatically rejected the snake-oil merchants, the fearmongers and the conspiracy theorists. As politicians we recognise that in supporting the vaccination of Victorians we must lead by example. As leaders of our communities and all Victorians, we must lead. Leadership is not asking of others what one is not prepared to do oneself. I am fully vaccinated with the Melbourne-made AstraZeneca vaccine.

The opposition supports the mandatory vaccination of certain frontline workers—those in health care, aged care and education. We think it is reasonable that nurses or paramedics caring for ill Victorians are vaccinated. We think it is sensible that those in contact with people sick with COVID-19 should themselves be vaccinated. We recognise that hospitals cannot function without their staff and everything possible must be done to protect those staff from becoming ill with COVID-19. That is why we have been so critical of the government’s failure until very recently to secure enough PPE for healthcare workers or to ensure that all of that PPE fits appropriately. We think aged-care workers should similarly be vaccinated, as it is of paramount importance that COVID-19 is kept as far away from the frail elderly as possible. Teachers work with children who, if they are under 12, cannot yet be vaccinated. Mandating vaccination for teachers makes sense to protect both the students and the teachers. At the same time, although very few children get very ill from COVID-19, they can catch and transmit the virus.

Because we support their mandatory vaccination, we support our mandatory vaccination. MPs must show solidarity with the nurses, paramedics, aged-care workers and teachers who have worked so hard, sacrificed so much and delivered such essential outcomes for so many Victorians. Us standing with them and saying, ‘The least we can do is also be vaccinated and prove that’ is a very small way of thanking them. We also support the vaccination of MPs because it allows us to do our jobs. It allows us to do this extraordinary role that we are all privileged to hold. I want to go back to visiting schools in Ripon. I want to visit hospitals and aged-care facilities in Ripon, and doing that is one of the most worthwhile parts of my job.

However, the opposition does not support the extension of mandatory vaccination by the government to all authorised workers and perhaps even beyond that. That is an overreach. It is divisive, and it is unnecessary. Victorians and for that matter all Australians have flocked to bare arms for the jab. Australia will likely end up over 90 per cent fully vaccinated. Only Gibraltar, the UAE and Portugal are currently over 85 per cent fully vaccinated. We will get leading vaccination rates without the heavy hand of the government forcing people in broad sectors of the workforce to get vaccinated.

But make no mistake, vaccination is the way out of this COVID-19 pandemic. I pay tribute to the many scientists who have developed working vaccines in record time, particularly Professor Sarah Gilbert and Dr Cath Green, co-creators of the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine—a vaccine made under licence by CSL in Melbourne. Vaccination is undoubtedly the way to reduce the severity of COVID-19 and reduce the chances of both catching COVID and transmitting it. However, vaccination is not the only tool in the public health response arsenal. All the modelling, whether Burnet, Doherty or someone else, is predicated on high levels of testing, good contact tracing and compliance with remaining restrictions. In simple terms, the epidemiologists recognise we need to know where the virus is and how fast it is spreading. We need some measures to reduce its spread, particularly as we move to 80 per cent and higher full vaccination rates.

The opposition has been calling for months for rapid antigen testing to be part of the public health response. We note the Royal Children’s Hospital has now introduced RAT from this Friday, following a COVID scare in its neonatal ICU ward. We believe RAT should be used to ensure no schools where VCE exams are being sat end up as exposure sites. VCE students have endured enough without further disruptions. We brought RAT to the Parliament on 2 August 2021, and we believe it has a place in making sure that no critical workplaces are closed due to being listed as an exposure site, and that would include hospitals, the Parliament, abattoirs—glasshouse horticulture is an example in my electorate—and many other settings. We also think rapid antigen testing is ideal for getting events opened again.

But rapid antigen testing is not an alternative to vaccination. Vaccination stops most people from getting sick enough to end up in ICU. Vaccination slows—not stops, but slows—the spread of the virus. Rapid antigen testing is neither of those things, but RAT has a place in ensuring nobody who comes to a workplace or an event is infectious, so rapid antigen testing has a place, even in a vaccinated society. Since we support rapid antigen testing, some may ask: why don’t we support it as an alternative for MPs attending the parliamentary precinct? Quite simply, no nurse, no paramedic, no teacher gets to say to her or his employer that they would rather have a rapid antigen test than get vaccinated and still come to work. If it is the rule for those workers, it is the rule for MPs. That is leadership.

I now turn to how this motion interacts with the constitution of Victoria, because it is a very serious proposal to exclude members of the house for any reason. It is rare, and it should be rare. We cannot approach this lightly no matter how much we think it is appropriate for MPs to get vaccinated. There are profound principles at stake—principles which underpin parliamentary democracy, principles that have evolved over centuries. So in considering the various mechanisms the house, the Parliament or the government could possibly employ to achieve the object of the motion before the house, I will consider four: firstly, an administrative order by the chief health officer (CHO) or another bureaucrat; secondly, legislation; thirdly, changes to the standing orders of the Assembly; or fourthly, a motion of the house.

If we go back to 1 October when the initial edict was made by the Premier at a press conference and with a media release, it included MPs—that MPs would be required to be vaccinated against COVID-19, and that came in the media release entitled ‘Vaccination Required to Protect Workers and Victoria’. And the Premier confirmed at his press conference that the mandate included MPs. However, such an approach is constitutionally problematic, to say the least. The Victorian constitution incorporates the rights of MPs as they existed in July 1855 in the UK House of Commons. A right inherited, as Erskine May asserts, is against any who would:

… obstruct Members in the discharge of their responsibilities to the House or in their participation in its proceedings.

Erskine May—I have got the 25th edition—at page 296 goes into quite a lot of depth to say:

It is a contempt to molest a Member of either House while attending the House, or coming to or going from it, and in the eighteenth century both Houses roundly condemned ‘assaulting, insulting or menacing Lords or Members’ going to or coming from the House or trying by force to influence them in their conduct in Parliament.

Now, this applies to everybody, and it applies to the executive of government as well, and perhaps most particularly to the executive of government—that no-one can stop us coming to the Parliament and exercising our right to say in the Parliament the things we are allowed to say here but nowhere else. It is a fundamental right in which the whole basis of freedom of speech and the rights—

Mr T Smith: The basis of privilege.

Ms STALEY: It is the basis of privilege, member for Kew. That is exactly right. So in this context ‘any who would obstruct members’ includes the executive of the government—and perhaps most notably it includes them.

Since June 1215 parliaments have asserted their independence from the Crown and then subsequently from the executive, and this is basic constitutional knowledge. Despite this, the Victorian Labor government and the Premier appeared not to have heard of any of this when they put out their original media release that just included both members of Parliament and the judiciary. And it is not as if this question has not been tested by the courts. The High Court in State Chamber of Commerce and Industry & Ors v. Commonwealth of Australia confirmed that MPs are not considered common-law employees—that is, a person employed by an employer with the right to control their work. Instead members of Parliament hold office. The fact that MPs are not employees, except concerning their personal taxation liability, is an important principle that should not be eroded.

Clearly an administrative order by the chief health officer, the government belatedly realised, was not going to fly, so the next option they could have taken was to legislate. That is the government’s right, and any such legislation brought in would trump the rights of the house. They could have done that. But that would have been a massive overreach because it would then, to be amended, require both houses, and that has implications for the rights of each house.

And then there is the standing orders amendment option. Also from Erskine May:

Each House has full responsibility for managing its internal administration …

There is substantial commentary on the rights of the houses to make their own standing orders. Our Parliament has had cause to debate exclusive cognisance, most recently about the Ombudsman’s investigation into the Labor Party’s abuse of electorate budgets, colloquially known as the red shirts affair. As Greg Taylor in The Constitution of Victoria said:

The Standing Orders cannot change the ordinary law of the land, as they are not statutes …

But as to what constitutes where a standing order has authority, Taylor referenced the Parliamentary Precincts Act 2001. Now, there are a plurality of views on what constitutes the parliamentary precinct or estate. Some would restrict the scope of standing orders to what goes on inside the chamber—that is far too narrow in my view—some to the building, others to the parliamentary precinct. The most expansive view includes not only the precinct but electorate offices and their staff, and I note that in a recent email to one of my colleagues the Department of Parliamentary Services appears to endorse this view, writing:

Electorate officers do not fall under the CHO’s directive as they are employed by the Presiding Officers …

Exempting electorate officers from the CHO’s directions adds weight to the view that electorate officers are also subject to the will of the house. At the very least the question of whether motions of the house and the standing orders apply is a live question that cannot be dismissed.

But of all the options to achieve what this motion seeks to achieve the lightest touch for members of the Assembly is a motion of the house with an end date, and that is what we have before us today. Now, I know most people are going to ignore the constitutional arguments. For many it is simply that MPs should be vaccinated like everybody else who is required to be, and how it is enforced is of no interest. But the constitutional arguments matter. Perhaps the only privilege of the house that many people could name is the right to say things in the house without being sued. This is freedom of speech, and it is a cornerstone of democracy. All the other privileges buttress that right, and the one that is here front and centre is the right to attend Parliament so that that freedom of speech can be exercised and also to represent our constituents. The motion before the house takes away that right from any MP who is not prepared to tell the Clerk his or her vaccination status. We should not trivialise or dismiss what we are doing here, so it is important, I think, to highlight the ways in which this motion before the house is drafted to limit how the house is proposing to remove that right, even temporarily.

Firstly, the motion explains in clauses (1) and (2) why this motion is being moved. It is explicit that this motion is to do with COVID-19 and the transmission of that virus. It is not a general health order; it is prescribed as a COVID-19 response, not for wider application. In particular the application of the motion is not known in advance, so we do not know who, if any, will be excluded as a result of this motion. It does not in its setting up exclude anyone on the basis of a protected attribute such as sex, race, political affiliation or religion. Now, other motions at other times and in other places may have done any of those things. That does not make them right, but it does mean that there is precedent for this motion.

This motion is highly constrained in putting out the reasons why it is taking this very, very drastic action and limiting the time lines, and that brings me to the final part of this motion. The final part of this motion says that:

The house may agree to further resolutions to—

vary or amend this resolution; or

provide for arrangements for sittings in 2022 based on the epidemiology and progress in the road map to implementing the national plan at the time.

So if we are in stage D of the national plan by the time we get to the second sitting day of next year, this motion should not be entertained again, because it is very simple that the national plan says that in stage D there are no restrictions differentiating the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. Therefore any rationale that we can accept today for this motion will be gone, because national cabinet and the plan that Victoria has signed up to—repeatedly the government tell us they are signed up to the national plan on the pandemic response—says that when we are at stage D, the final stage, we do not have these sorts of restrictions. And I can tell you, and I am sure all of us believe, we cannot get to that day fast enough.

I am very, very hopeful for many reasons that this is the only time we will move this motion. It is the only time we will need to consider this matter. I say that on the constitutional side, but I say it more for all Victorians, because this time at the beginning of February we should not have these restrictions. We should be vaccinated, we should be living—

Mr T Smith: We will be vaccinated.

Ms STALEY: We will be vaccinated, member for Kew. You are right. We will have one of the highest vaccination rates on the planet, and we should enjoy the fruits of our labours—the fact that we have done the hard work, rolled up our sleeves, got vaccinated.

I appreciate that there are people getting vaccinated who would prefer not to, but they are doing the thing that their community demands of them, that their families demand of them. It is not an easy thing for some people and I do not trivialise that, but we are close—we are so close—and I very, very much implore all those in this place to stick to the national plan and to commit that when we come back in February we will not have to consider such a motion again. This is serious. Everybody in this place knows this is serious. We do not seek to exclude anybody from coming to this place, representing their constituents, having the rights and freedoms that we enjoy to speak in this place freely taken away from him or her. I cannot put that more clearly. We do not come to this position lightly, but it is the right position. Leadership requires us to stand with the nurses, the paramedics, the aged-care workers that we are requiring to be vaccinated. Common sense tells us we must do that, and with that I commend the motion to the house.

Dr READ (Brunswick) (09:51): I will not prolong this unnecessarily, but I do want to set out the Greens’ position on the motion and also to thank the member for Ripon for her excellent speech.

It seems only fair that if the government requires over a million mostly lower paid essential workers to be vaccinated this should apply to MPs as well, and that is why the Greens support this motion. At first reading we were concerned about this motion because it requires the Presiding Officers to send the names of non-complying MPs to members of the house. It could set a precedent to override MPs’ privilege in the future. These were our initial concerns. There appears, however, to be no alternative to supplying the names of non-complying MPs to other members, because members of the house need to know who they are suspending. So that would appear to be unavoidable. Also, the motion sets an end date—as the member for Ripon has explained, the second sitting day of next year—and gives protecting members and staff from COVID as its justification. Both of these points make it more difficult to use this as a precedent for future suspension of a group of MPs for another reason.

However, we do remain concerned that mandatory vaccination, whether for MPs or anyone else, undermines the basic right to consent to health care. So, looking at that in a little more detail, first of all, the public health argument for mandatory vaccination is not that strong, given the likely high coverage of vaccination in the parliamentary precinct and including MPs. If two or three MPs are not vaccinated, they will potentially expose other vaccinated individuals to the virus, with minimal public health impact. The much stronger argument, however, is one of fairness, and that is one that previous speakers have stepped out in detail. We do believe, however, that mandatory vaccination should only ever be a last resort—a last resort after trying everything else. The Greens think that vaccination should only be mandatory for an occupational group, first, if there is a strong public health justification for that sector, and only after extensive efforts to educate staff and to make vaccination readily available.

I just want to speak now to what has been termed anti-vaxxism, the phenomenon that seems widespread and fed by and amplified by misinformation at the moment, and just point out that a lot of the individuals who have contacted I suspect many MPs in this place are genuinely motivated by fear and that, while they are misinformed, their fear is sincere. I think that we need to acknowledge that and understand that they require reassurance as much as possible, education as much as possible, and a mandate only as a last resort. If making vaccination widely available and education widely available in all languages and in all corners of our state is done properly, mandates should not normally be needed. But we do understand the pressure on the state, on the Department of Health, on the government, the sense of urgency and the growing pressure on our hospital system, and we understand the circumstances in which the broader mandate for authorised workers in Victoria has arisen.

We do nevertheless believe that more could have been done in terms of making vaccines available in workplaces and in educating people, particularly people who are not closely politically engaged, people who do not watch press conferences. More still needs to be done, but we are surprised and delighted with the dramatic speed with which Victorians are getting vaccinated, and that is truly impressive. Victoria normally, however, achieves very high levels of vaccination coverage because vaccination enjoys a very positive social licence in this state; people understand its importance. Mandatory vaccination risks eroding this social licence and could feasibly threaten our community’s willingness to take part in future health programs. I hope it does not, but we will have to wait and see.

We agree that the current health emergency requires very high levels of vaccination in all authorised workers, of well above 90 per cent, and as I have said, we do understand the urgency and therefore we are not opposing the mandate. But we argue, as has I think the member for Ripon, that this mandate covering authorised workers should end as soon as the epidemiological need diminishes. Our rapid progress in vaccination and the New South Wales experience suggest that the Victorian epidemic may diminish in a few months, and that means that we should be able to put an end date, either a calendar date or a vaccination prevalence, to this mandate, which would reassure people that this limitation of rights is only temporary.

Mr ANGUS (Forest Hill) (09:57): I rise today to oppose the motion before the house. I want to say from the outset that I am not in any way anti-vaccination. The important thing for all Victorians to realise is that in my opinion this motion is actually not about vaccinations, it is about freedoms—freedom for an individual to make a choice regarding a provisionally approved invasive medical procedure, freedom to be a part of society, freedom to have a job and earn a living, freedom to keep private your personal medical records, freedom of democracy. In my opinion freedoms are well worth fighting for.

As a member of the Liberal Party, I stand here today to defend the very basic and vital values of this party: the values of freedom, of individual responsibility and of personal choice. I also stand here for all the people who, whether through necessity or free choice, are not receiving this vaccination. I am standing here for the many thousands of Victorians who are about to lose their jobs tomorrow as a result of exercising their conscience and their free choice. I am standing here for the people who have been coerced into being vaccinated. I am also standing here for all the doctors who have been forbidden from exercising their best medical judgements for their patients. I am standing here for the ordinary Victorians who have been silenced and are forbidden from gathering together to express a point of view different from this government. I am standing here for the many faith communities who are facing the issue of having to turn people away from their services and facilities.

Countless people from the Forest Hill district and way beyond, across a wide range of occupations, have contacted me and expressed their despair and hopelessness that they are about to lose their livelihoods and do not know what they are going to do. The Prime Minister has clearly stated that vaccinations for COVID-19 will be voluntary. In a letter dated 6 September 2021 the Prime Minister stated in relation to the vaccine:

… it will not be compulsory to have the vaccine. The Government is clear that vaccination is a personal choice

The Australian Department of Health Therapeutic Goods Administration website clearly states that the COVID-19 vaccines currently being used are provisionally approved—all subsequent to January 2021. The stated purpose of the motion before the house is:

… to protect the health and safety of members and parliamentary staff and reduce the risk of transmission of COVID-19 …

I unequivocally note that I am certain no unvaccinated person would want to get COVID or, even more importantly, pass COVID on to anyone else. However, it is very important for all Victorians to understand that a vaccinated person can get COVID-19 and can also transmit COVID-19. Given this, one simple solution would be what the Liberal-Nationals have been calling on the government to do for many months, and that is to introduce rapid testing. This simple and effective test would give a real-time assessment of a person’s COVID-19 status and thus virtually eliminate any risk. The other key missing part of the solution that I have raised in this place and elsewhere multiple times is that of early treatments for COVID-19. Many other places in the world have successfully used early treatments against COVID-19, and I again urge both the state and federal governments to investigate and pursue these options as a matter of utmost urgency.

The result of the Premier’s announcement on 1 October this year is that medical apartheid will be commencing in Victoria in a few days time. Victoria will be a two-class society. A great leader will always inspire with hope and a clear vision. This is one of the most important roles and characteristics of a successful leader. A great leader brings people together and unites them. They do not divide people, especially in a time of great difficulty. They do not shame people, blame people and pit one person against another. Here in Victoria we have never seen a more divided and broken society. The moving of this motion and the issuing of public orders to effect this for the broader community clearly demonstrate this. Victoria will become a two-tier society. Unvaccinated people will be sacked from their jobs and will be excluded from the ordinary functioning of society. Is this what we want for Victoria, especially in light of our accelerating vaccination rate?

In Victoria we have been governed by fear for the last 18 months. Every day Victorians are lectured, berated and punished by government MPs and representatives despite the overwhelming number of people doing their very best and complying with the rules. Victorians are living in fear of COVID-19, in fear of the police and authorities, in fear of having or sharing a point of view different to the government’s, in fear of segregation and in fear of others, even friends or neighbours.

Alarmingly I note that in the UK House of Commons recently a bill entitled the ‘COVID-19 Vaccine Damage Bill’ has been introduced. The long title of this bill is, and I quote:

A Bill to require the Secretary of State to establish an independent review of disablement caused by Covid-19 vaccinations and the adequacy of the compensation offered to persons so disabled; and for connected purposes.

It is a bill about all the people who have suffered severe adverse effects or death as a result of a COVID-19 vaccination. Given the numerous reports of significant adverse events and damage I have heard of throughout Australia, sadly I will not be at all surprised to see a similar bill being required here at some stage. The concept that a house of parliament under the wonderful Westminster tradition can demand that any of its elected members undertake a provisionally approved invasive medical procedure to be eligible to sit in this place is an unprecedented proposition and attacks the very heart of our democratic system.

Given the very recent backflips on government decrees made regarding judges and commonwealth employees, the actual legality of many of the government’s ad hoc announcements may well be questionable. In the last almost two years many of the rights and freedoms that all Victorians had previously enjoyed and had largely taken for granted have been removed in the name of COVID-19. I understand and agree with the need for some of them, but I and my Liberal-National colleagues have repeatedly spoken out against many of these restrictions as being too onerous, ineffective or just plain mean spirited. I note that for virtually all of the restrictions Victorians are still waiting to see the actual health advice that lies behind them, advice which the government has repeatedly refused to release. In my opinion we are racing towards a totalitarian regime here in Victoria, and it has to stop. I have not got time to speak about the numerous charters, codes and conventions that the actions of the Andrews government have repeatedly breached over the last 18 months, but they are many.

I would like to thank all the ambos, nurses, doctors and other staff in the hospitals who are working tirelessly under very challenging conditions to treat patients who have COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccine injuries and other ailments. It has been an extremely stressful time for them, and I trust that they will remain strong over the coming days and months as they care for all these patients. I would like to thank all the psychiatrists, psychologists and counsellors who are also working tirelessly as a result of being inundated with people suffering immensely from increased stress and anxiety as a result of Victoria’s world-record lockdown, from the mandatory vaccination orders, as well as from the ongoing fear and shame campaign pushed by the Premier.

I would like to thank all the doctors who have been giving early treatment and care to their patients and have helped hundreds of people to recover from COVID-19 and prevented them from being hospitalised. In particular I note the important work being done by expert doctors all around the world such as Dr Pierre Kory, Dr Paul Marik, Dr Simone Gold, Dr Brian Tyson, Dr Peter McCullough, Professor Thomas Borody, Dr Joseph Varon and countless other doctors who have been on the front line of COVID-19 and have been and still are successfully treating COVID-19 patients. These highly qualified, hardworking doctors have in many cases dared to go against the groupthink and government mantra.

In conclusion, for the reasons I have stated I believe this motion is wrong and should be opposed, which I will do.

Following speeches incorporated in accordance with resolution of house of 7 October:

Ms CUPPER (Mildura)

I rise to speak in support of the government’s motion on vaccine mandates for MPs.

The global medical consensus is that the COVID-19 vaccine is safe and effective.

It is built upon a century worth of vaccine science and at least a decade of SARS-specific vaccine research. The COVID-19 vaccine has been put through rigorous clinical trials.

If you are vaccinated, you might still catch or transmit the virus, but you are much less likely to end up in hospital or die.

In my community, most people are vaccinated. More than 90 per cent of people aged 16 or over have had their first dose. If only that was enough. If only the remaining few didn’t make a difference.

But they will make a difference. Their decision to not get vaccinated will not only impact children and those with legitimate medical exemptions but the vaccinated population too.

The more the virus is circulating in the community, the longer it will linger, the more people it will infect and the greater the opportunity for further mutations which might eventually overcome the vaccine. In other words, none of us is safe until we all are, or at least a very high majority are.

Vaccine mandates are not new. They were introduced in 2015 by the federal coalition government. The no jab, no welfare policy was designed to address a resurgence of whooping cough in unvaccinated children. The Labor state government’s no jab, no play policy had the same goal. There are COVID-19 vaccine mandates for authorised workers in NSW and in the federal aged care sector.

In a democracy, personal freedom is not absolute. It never has been. It is always balanced against the community interest. Indoor smoking bans and mandatory seatbelts are further examples.

The bottom line is that vaccine mandates for COVID-19 will lead to more people being vaccinated. This will reduce the frequency and severity of lockdowns. It will be a lifeline to small business. That’s why the vaccine mandate for authorised workers was justified and sensible. And if it applies to a teacher or a truck driver, it should apply to us too.

It’s not rocket science, it’s vaccine science, and it’s saving countless lives. I support the government’s motion.

Mr ROWSWELL (Sandringham)

I support vaccines, I am double vaccinated, but I oppose vaccine mandates.

I made my decision to be vaccinated freely and without coercion. I did so having spoken to my doctor and my family. It was my choice.

I have also encouraged members of my community to be vaccinated in consultation with their doctors. There has been an overwhelming response in Bayside, with 92.9 per cent single dosed and 74.3 per cent double dosed. This is a commendable achievement.

As of yesterday, 86.7 per cent of all Victorians have received their first dose and 61.5 per cent have received their second. We will undoubtably hit our vaccination targets—we will reach the numbers that the national plan advises in order for us to open up the state.

So why has the Victorian government mandated vaccination for essential workers? Why have they chosen to use a stick when the overwhelming majority of our community are getting vaccinated? Why does this government seek to divide us further at a time when our community needs hope, optimism and certainty more than ever before?

It is my strong view that freedom of choice and the right to make informed decisions about your own health are key pillars of democracy. Freedom to choose matters and must always be accompanied by individual responsibility: accepting the benefits and consequences of the decision made.

These concerns are not mine alone. I speak for my community, employers, small businesses, leaders, mothers, fathers and many more who have written to me, who are vaccinated but fear living in a state where our community is further divided into a two-tiered system when lockdown ends—the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.

I have had small business owners tell me that they will no longer be able to employ people based on the government’s vaccine mandate, but those same business owners have no way of replacing that experienced staff member before the reopening of their business.

It deeply concerns me that over the course of this pandemic, if there is one thing the state government has successfully achieved, it is further dividing our community. The government decides who can work and who cannot work, who you can visit and who you cannot visit, who can worship and who cannot worship, who can go to a restaurant, pub, concert, the races and who cannot.

Further, the government’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate motion has the potential to undermine the opportunity for democratically elected members of Parliament to attend Parliament and the parliamentary precinct. This should also be of deep concern to every Victorian.

MPs are democratically elected and represent those who have elected them in the state’s Parliament. By having the ability to restrict participation in the Parliament, this motion places a barrier between the needs of a community and an MP advocating for those needs in the Parliament. This motion hasn’t considered the possibility of rapid COVID testing as a way for every MP to fully participate in Parliament, and that is indeed a great shame.

Political representation is essential to a liberal democracy. Without it, democracy is significantly undermined.

Again, I support vaccines, I am double vaccinated, but I oppose vaccine mandates.

Freedom of choice matters, and that must be defended.

The SPEAKER: The question is:

That the motion moved by the Leader of the House be agreed to.

All of that opinion say aye.

Members: Aye.

The SPEAKER: To the contrary, no.

Mr Angus: No.

The SPEAKER: I think the ayes have it.

Mr Angus: The noes have it.

The SPEAKER: A division is required. Ring the bells.

Bells rung.

The SPEAKER: I ask members to take their allocated seats, and I ask the Clerk to record the votes.

The Clerk: The member for Mildura, the member for Morwell, the member for Shepparton.

Ms Sheed: Yes.

The Clerk: The Greens representative.

Dr Read: One yes.

The Clerk: Nationals representative.

Ms Ryan: Two yeses.

The Clerk: Liberal Party representative.

A member: Four ayes.

The Clerk: Labor Party representative.

Mr Cheeseman: Thirteen ayes.

The Clerk: Are there any other votes? The member for Forest Hill.

Mr Angus: My vote is no.

The SPEAKER: Order! As there is only one vote for the noes, the division cannot proceed. Therefore under standing order 165(7) I advise the house that the motion is agreed to. I ask the member for Forest Hill if he would like his dissent recorded.

Motion agreed to.

Mr Angus: Thank you, Speaker. I would like my dissent recorded in the minutes.

The SPEAKER: Your dissent will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings.

Bills

Great Ocean Road and Environs Protection Amendment Bill 2021

Council’s amendments

Message from Council relating to following amendment considered:

NEW CLAUSE

Insert the following New Clause to follow clause 18—

‘18A Further amendment of section 66

After subsection 66(1) of the Principal Act insert—

“(1A) Before regulations are made for the purposes of subsection (1)(b) or (1)(c), the Minister must consider any advice of the Authority in respect of any financial impacts or burdens on local communities of the tolls, fees and charges.”.’.

10:13:07): I move:

That the amendment be agreed to.

Ms McLEISH (Eildon) (10:13): I rise to make a few comments on the amendment that has just been brought in, and I actually am pleased that there was a little bit of notice given for this amendment this time. Last week we had an amendment that was popped in first thing, 9 o’clock in the morning, when we had no insight into the fact that it was being introduced at that particular point. I was actually quite pleased to see this today on the Clerk’s daily program. This was a bill that was introduced with six days for us to consider it, and at the time we did make a lot of mention that six days was inadequate for a bill which encompasses so many different agencies and community groups, that it was an inadequate amount of time for us to do the appropriate consultation.

I am here now to talk about the amendment that was introduced by Mr Grimley in the other place for the Justice Party, which we did support in the other place. And I note, from the information that he has provided, that a number of community groups and the Corangamite shire did support this. Now, I do want to make a few more comments because Mr Grimley did say, in the notes and the information that he provided to us—and these were some of the thoughts that we had as well and that we raised in committee on this—that there was no business case for the operation of the new authority that is to be established. That was a great concern, and that remains a concern for us, because there were quite a number of questions that we raised that were unable to be answered by the government. I do understand and appreciate that for the minister in the other place who was managing this bill, it was not his bill, so that is a little bit difficult and the minister did his best; however, we are still very concerned that there were a number of areas that were not adequately addressed.

One of the issues of these changes is that the authority must have regard to the ‘financial impacts or burdens on local communities of the tolls, fees and charges’. Whilst it is a good thing to have regard to those—because a lot of the locals are very worried about what those tolls and charges are, the extent of those and who is going to be pinged for them, so to speak, or hit financially for them—we think we did not get the answers here, because the government have not done all of the thinking around this. There is so much that is still to be done. We think having regard is better than it not being there, but we would have perhaps preferred something a little bit stronger along the lines of specific exemptions for local residents or perhaps local ratepayers.

Now, on that point, we asked what a local was, and it was very unclear what the definition of a ‘local’ would be. If you live in one local government area very close to the boundary of another local government area and you go to a particular beach and park your car there, you surf there, are you still a local if it is 10 or 15 minutes away? The minister the day before yesterday during committee was able to say that if you come from Melbourne and you go down there, well, yes, clearly you are not a local. But if you go 15 kilometres to a beach and you have been doing that for ages, are you then considered a local—or if you have come from a neighbouring town? So we still had a lot of questions around that, and they could not be answered. Another area that I want to bring up is that the maps that were provided were very hard to read. We had a lot of trouble downloading them, and then they were still quite vague because they included areas in the maps that actually had exemptions in the bill. I think that was a little bit misleading.

As I said, we had concerns around the detail in the bill, and like Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party we had concerns about the costs, the charges and the taxes and whether roads would be tolled. Another example too was that the authority is to be self-sufficient. How are they going to raise the revenues to be self-sufficient? We understand that there are some existing revenue opportunities that will be transferred into the new authority, and whilst that is fine, regarding the amount for this new authority to be self-sufficient, first of all we were unable to be told how much they would require. But we also know that with the assets that will be transferred progressively in four years, there is an enormous backlog of maintenance, a multimillion-dollar backlog of maintenance. So is this new authority going to assume the liability straight up for multimillions of dollars? And how are they going to raise that revenue? To be self-sufficient and not reliant on the state purse is actually what we were told in the briefing is the aim here. The extent of the maintenance backlog is really quite extraordinary—and what is going to happen about that backlog? Is that going to be addressed before the assets are transferred, or as I said, is that liability going to go and is this new authority going to be behind the eight ball and dependent on the state purse initially?

But as I said with regard to these specific amendments, the coalition did support them in the other place, and we do support the amendment here.

Ms D’AMBROSIO (Mill Park—Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change, Minister for Solar Homes) (10:19):(By leave) I just want to add a few words of thank you to all those who have participated in this very important debate on this bill. It delivers on a strong commitment that we made to deliver on recommendations that came out of very considerable consultations across the region—the Great Ocean Road and the many communities there. Certainly the second bill that has now been returned to us amended is one that I think is very much reflective of our intent for community consultation and engagement, and I am very pleased that we are able to finally deliver on all of the legislative reforms through bills for this reform that the government committed to before the last election.

Motion agreed to.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: A message will now be sent to the Legislative Council informing them of the house’s decision.

Terrorism (Community Protection) Amendment Bill 2021

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Ms HUTCHINS:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Mr T SMITH (Kew) (10:20): I rise to not oppose the Terrorism (Community Protection) Amendment Bill 2021 and particularly support the delaying of the expiry of the original act, the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003, noting the consequential amendments that are contained in this piece of legislation that are an Australian first and are entirely consistent with the national counterterrorism plan and strategy that was released by the federal government in 2015.

It is important to note 20 years on from 9/11 how important these pieces of legislation are for the protection of our country, of our society and indeed of our way of life. Twenty years ago 10 Australians lost their lives in the then most egregious terror attack against Australians. Nineteen years ago the largest ever loss of life of Australians in a terror attack occurred in Bali, and this Parliament remembers the 88 Australians who lost their lives in that horrendous attack, in the garden to the side of Parliament. Those terror attacks have essentially changed the very nature of global politics, of national debate and indeed of law enforcement throughout the Western world and obviously within Australia itself over the last 20 years.

I remember 9/11 vividly. I was in year 12. It was one of the last school-assessed coursework days that I had in year 12. It was 12 September 2001. The shock and horror with which I and my then classmates witnessed the murder of 3000 innocent people by a terror attack—an unprecedented terror attack and the world’s deadliest terror attack, flying two aircraft into the World Trade Center in New York City—certainly influenced my life, certainly influenced the politics of my time in particular at university and really has bookended the last 20 years, between the 9/11 attacks and the withdrawal from Kabul that we have witnessed in recent months. That is of great concern, because the al-Qaeda terrorists that took down those towers were harboured by the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Taliban have now retaken Afghanistan, to my great horror and to the horror of so many returned servicemen and the families of the diggers that we lost in Afghanistan defending freedom, defending our interests and indeed defending the women and children of Afghanistan.

I make these points because this bill is all interrelated with a global dynamic a long way from Spring Street. I want to put this bill in that context because it is important. It is important that we understand that the loss of life that we saw in Bali and in New York and the terror attacks that have been averted by ASIO and by law enforcement agencies across the states and territories of Australia are interrelated and that the war on terror has not ended and it will be with us forever. You see, the head of ASIO said quite recently that the likelihood of another terror attack is probable. Mike Burgess said this in April this year. And yes, there are multiple domestic challenges at the moment that are taking up reams of coverage, COVID-19 being the most obvious. But the nation’s counterterrorism approach and indeed strategy are still very important for keeping our people safe, and this bill I think is a wonderful early intervention at preventing someone from going down the path of violent extremism and where they might commit a terror offence. A number of the aspects of this bill I support and have great merit and should be replicated in other Australian jurisdictions.

The bill provides for a voluntary countering violent extremism case management scheme. It creates the civil support and engagement order, an SEO; establishes the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel, which is a terrible mouthful and which I will refer to as ‘the panel’ going forward in these remarks; and creates a standalone information sharing scheme to support the voluntary case management and SEO schemes.

The multi-agency panel is a wonderful initiative because at its very core it establishes the multifaceted reasons why youth in particular go down the path of extremism and how early intervention, not just from law enforcement but from all the social policy angles of the state, could potentially get that individual back on track, and I think that is a very worthy goal. It is good to see that the government has taken various pieces of advice on board to bring about this multi-agency panel. The panel will include representation from government departments and agencies, such as the departments of health; families, fairness and housing; education; justice and community safety; jobs, precincts and regions; and Victoria Police, and quoting from the second-reading speech from the minister:

Each representative will be nominated by the department’s Secretary or Commissioner, and then appointed by the Secretary—

of the department of justice.

Where specific expertise is required, the Secretary—

of the department of justice—

… can also appoint non public-sector employees to the—

panel—

… such as subject-matter experts in … risk assessment or case management, or practitioners in child and adolescent mental health

The voluntary case management approach is something I also support. This process is essentially triggered by the Chief Commissioner of Police referring an individual to the Secretary of the Department of Justice and Community Safety.

Now, one of the concerns I have is that I am not sure what thresholds or indeed what behaviours would trigger the commissioner to refer an individual—a child or an adult, as it were—for voluntary case management. One would suggest that it was relatively obvious radicalised behaviour, and I would have thought that common sense would prevail, but I think it would be a worthwhile exercise for the government at the very least to disclose the nature of some of those triggers that the chief commissioner would be looking for. I put on record my thanks for the very thorough briefing that I received from the department for this bill. I do think that for the chief commissioner to go down that path and to refer to the secretary of the department of justice there needs to be a set of criteria, as it were. As I said earlier, that would to my mind be relatively common sense, but in saying that, it is something that I wanted to raise in debate.

I am advised that it is not expected that there would be that many orders and that particularly the support and engagement order would only apply to a very small number of people—as you would hope, as you would absolutely hope. I would say that despite the fact that we know that ASIO and Victoria Police have worked hand in glove now for 20 years or longer to protect Victorians from the scourge of terrorism and violent extremism, at any given time there are significant counterterrorism operations going on in Melbourne and in Sydney, so we would be naive to think that there are not people in our city, in our state and in our nation that mean us harm and mean our way of life harm.

That I suppose leads me to the SEO, which is a civil order, and it is applied for in the Magistrates or the Children’s Court. As I said earlier, this will be for a very narrow class of person where there is some concern over their propensity for radicalisation, as the minister said in her second-reading speech:

• disengaging people who are radicalising towards violent extremism;

• addressing the underlying causes of their radicalisation;

• connecting or reconnecting people with the community and positive support networks; and

• by doing so, protect the community from the threat of violent extremism.

The threshold for the court awarding one of these orders—granting one of these orders, as it were—would be that on the balance of probabilities the respondent is radicalising toward violent extremism and that the order is an appropriate way to achieve a therapeutic purpose for them. That is, it is going to go to the nub, the heart, the underlying cause of why they are heading down that path.

It is an age-old adage that an early intervention—prevention essentially—is far better than a cure. I think really, to summarise this bill, that this is a preventative measure enshrined in legislation that is far better than a cure, because the cure unfortunately looks like this, and I quote from 11 October in the Sydney Morning Herald:

A Sydney man—

and I will not use his name, because I do not want to glorify these people any more than they think that they are glorified by being in the newspaper—

… admitted to being a member of IS and pleaded guilty in the NSW Supreme Court to two charges: planning terrorist attacks on Australian soil, and preparing to engage in foreign fighting with the terrorist group in Afghanistan—

that is, ISIS—

… The maximum penalty for each offence is life in prison.

This individual was jailed for seven years. This man is 22 years old. He was a threat to Australia and its people and appropriately jailed. This is a life now not necessarily wasted—because hopefully he will recover; hopefully there are programs in New South Wales where this man can be rehabilitated—but you would have to say that this man’s life is not heading in the right direction, that this man’s life could well be wasted and that if someone had got to him earlier, if an agency of the state or a community group had got to this man earlier and uncovered whatever it was that was so disturbing him that he went down that path towards violent extremism, then maybe he would not be in jail and maybe he would not have been the threat that he clearly is to our country. That is why these stories are so tragic, because this is a wasted life. A man is now in jail for going down the path of violent extremism and planning a terror attack, where in actual fact, had there been an early intervention, which the program enshrined in this bill would attempt to do, he could have been persuaded, he could have been encouraged—in fact there could have been a mental health intervention that could have alleviated this sort of behaviour, and that is why I think this is a good idea.

That is why I will not be opposing this bill. It is why the national counterterrorism strategy in 2015 talked openly about state and territory law enforcement agencies working with the commonwealth and particularly to ensure that people do not become radicalised in the first place. The most effective defence against terrorism is to prevent people from becoming terrorists in the first place. There is no one process or pathway to radicalisation, to violent extremism. The exact combination of causes and drivers are unique to each individual, but the common element is exposure to violent extremist ideology. If we can start those early interventions, particularly from family and friends and communities but also from the state, as this multipanel approach suggests, then I do think there is every likelihood that this program will have a very positive effect on the ground and that it could well dissuade those going down the path towards violent extremism from doing so. That will make our community a safer place. It will make Victoria a better place and make Australia a better place and hopefully stop the horrible incidents we have seen both at home and abroad over the last two decades. I thank the house.

Mr EDBROOKE (Frankston) (10:37): It is an absolute pleasure to rise this morning and speak on the Terrorism (Community Protection) Amendment Bill 2021, and I am pleased to see that this bill has bipartisan support from the opposition as well. I think it is worth noting that Australia was somewhat distanced from terrorism for a very long time. It was something that we saw on the news that happened on foreign soil, but over the last two decades we have seen terrorism increasingly closer to home and on our home soil. We have gone from the 9/11 crisis and catastrophe to the Bali bombings, which were overseas. But now we have seen in the last decade incidents like the Sydney Lindt cafe siege, and we have seen the Dandenong RSL or shrine planned attack which was foiled thanks to some great work from our law enforcement. At one stage we thought that the global economy would protect us somewhat from terrorism, and I guess that has not happened. We probably put a bit too much faith in that. But the nature of this terrorism crossing our border now means we need a cross-jurisdictional approach to it, and this very important legislation here today does that.

The legislation provides a range of preventative measures and capabilities that are required to prevent terrorism on our shores and maintain the national cooperative approach to counterterrorism as well. Now, the commonwealth has enacted specific anti-terrorism laws which can be found in the Criminal Code Act 1995 at part 5.3, division 100 onwards. And criminal offences covering terrorism are primarily dealt with under the Commonwealth Criminal Code, which is intended to be comprehensive and uniform across all of Australia. Now, Victoria enacted the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003, which I will refer to as ‘the act’ from now on, to cover those areas where Victoria continued to have a legislative responsibility. And given the significant powers of the act, it has a statutory review provision and sunset provisions that require us to remake the legislation after review most of the time to enable its ongoing operation. The act has been reviewed twice previously. A statutory review was completed in 2014, and the 2017 Harper-Lay review led to significant amendments in 2018 under this government.

The Department of Justice and Community Safety conducted the most recent review to inform the remaking or otherwise of the act, which will otherwise sunset on 1 December, and the review was supported by an expert advisory panel consisting of the Honourable David Harper, former AFP assistant commissioner Leanne Close and academic Lydia Khalil. That review found there is an ongoing need for the powers in the act, and the review was tabled in Parliament in August. On the basis of that review the bill extends the sunset clause of the terrorism protection act, and while the act currently deals principally with powers that enforcement agencies utilise when a person has been radicalised to the point where a terrorist attack is being planned or is imminent, a range of new reforms in the bill will now provide a framework to help divert vulnerable people away from radicalisation before they present a threat to the Victorian community, as recommended by the Harper-Lay expert panel.

At this point it is entirely appropriate to thank our Victorian police, especially at this time, and our other law enforcement agencies. I think it is very fair to say that at this point in time the situational awareness, the patience and the intelligence that our police have shown in recent times, in recent protests, has been astounding. We are talking about protests where we have got police in hospital with COVID that they have caught from those protests. We have got police that are injured, and I just want to put on record my appreciation and respect for those police that do that job.

In saying that, it is really important to note today, especially today, that language matters and the language that community leaders use when they are speaking in their communities matters. And it does in a lot of portfolios, but in this one in particular. We have just witnessed, 20 minutes ago, someone quite privileged identifying with the word ‘apartheid’ and identifying with the words ‘totalitarian regime’—like they would know what that is. Now, a student of history would never ever use those terms in this context, and I think there is a real danger, when our community leaders use those words out of context, that they become troubadours for I guess a tacit encouragement of right-wing behaviour. There will be people listening at home, hearing those words, justifying their own actions because of what their community leaders have said. It adds more fuel to the fire, and there is a level of naivety there that can be the fuel to the fire that others want to start. It is one thing for even some members in the other house to use the word ‘dictator’, to take selfies and to stir up crowds and walk away; it is another thing to actually have to deal with the consequences of those actions, as Victoria Police do every single day. We sure appreciate them, and they are spoken about quite a bit in this house for the obvious reason that they do such a good job.

It has already been mentioned, but ASIO reports have come out recently that show right-wing extremists are becoming more organised and sophisticated. They use online resources better, and their ideologies are becoming more widely known. And while ASIO have been monitoring these threats for such a long time, this year these right-wing extreme individuals have comprised around one-third of the nation’s counterterrorism investigative subjects, so it is really important that people understand that terrorism is not what we once thought it was offshore. Domestic terrorism can be people with a right-wing ideology that believe violence is going to get them the goal they want. Many of these groups and individuals have seized on COVID-19, really seeing a wedge there that they can reinforce their narratives with or use to provide a foundation for their conspiracies. They, I guess, see this crisis as, and I quote:

… proof of the failure of globalisation, multiculturalism and democracy and confirmation that societal collapse and a ‘race war’ are inevitable.

So we have really got to be careful with that language. But this legislation today is here, I would say, as a bill that is about preventing terrorism for Victorians along with the commonwealth framework and making sure that when it does happen we are prepared for it as well.

The bill will address the current act’s expiry date on 1 December this year by extending its operation for a further 10 years, and the amendments in the bill will implement the key recommendations from the aforementioned expert panel on terrorism and violent extremism, which reviewed the operation and effectiveness of this act. The expert panel’s second report identified gaps and barriers to multi-agency coordination of the countering violent extremism interventions, and barriers to information sharing as well.

The bill in many ways is improving on what we have had for the last couple of years. It establishes the countering violent extremism voluntary case management scheme; it establishes support and engagement order schemes to address the underlying causes of persons radicalising towards violent extremism; it establishes a statutory framework for the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel; and it establishes a standalone information-sharing scheme to support the functions of the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel. In addition this bill also extends that sunset clause which we spoke about earlier. The bill also amends the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine Act 1985 to clarify appointment requirements for the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine Council.

There is nothing truer said than, as we have heard many academics say, getting people that could be prone to extremism before they become radicalised is the key to this. This bill goes a long way to ensuring that in our multicultural community we are doing the right thing in a proactive way to ensure that that happens; we are not just dealing with the end result, which as we have seen overseas and on our own soil is terribly tragic and scars so many people and our culture as well.

As I said, I just remind members of Parliament that our language matters in so many matters, but when we are talking about terrorism and we are using words like ‘dictator’, ‘apartheid’ and ‘regimes’, it matters. I commend this bill to the house.

Mr TAK (Clarinda) (10:47): I am grateful to be able to make a contribution to the debate on the Terrorism (Community Protection) Amendment Bill 2021, and it is also great to follow our lead speaker, the member for Frankston. I congratulate and commend him on reminding us that language matters in this bill, which is very important.

This is an important bill, and I thank both the Attorney-General and the Minister for Police for bringing forward these important amendments. Violent extremism can take place in many forms. I have spoken before here in this place on the Christchurch terror attack. That was an event that really shocked me, and it still does. It was more than two years ago, and I would just like to again share my condolences with the families of those who were affected. I remember at the time I humbly joined the Indonesian Muslim community of Victoria in my electorate at the Masjid Westall mosque for a solidarity event that was held there. One of the quotes really struck me at the mosque, and I try to remind myself of it quite often:

God created different tribes, complete with different colours and languages. The purpose is not to hate each other but to learn from each other.

I still think this is a very powerful message—a message that reminds us all that diversity is our strength.

So I think these changes are timely, and I am very happy to see this bill here today. The world is becoming a more complex place—like our lead speaker, the speaker before me, said. Crime is also becoming a more complex issue, and it is changing and evolving. Organised crime and crimes such as terrorism are really complex issues, so I am glad to see this government continue to strive to address this issue.

As mentioned, violent extremism can take many forms, and radicalising can also occur in many different settings and communities. We are not immune to it in our community in Clarinda. I would like to say in my contribution that Neil Prakash was an Australian citizen and a senior member of the Islamic State group. He was born in Melbourne, here, to a Fijian father and a Cambodian mother from Springvale South. He attended meetings at the Al-Furqan Islamic centre in Springvale South, which was linked to the arrest of five Melbourne teenagers over a sickening plot to attack police at Anzac Day services in 2015. Fortunately he was arrested in Turkey in 2016 and convicted in a Turkish court of membership in a terrorist organisation and sentenced to 7½ years imprisonment. Radicalisation can happen anywhere, and as such I am glad to see that this bill is here today.

The bill has three objectives, and I would just like to run through those here. Firstly, the bill addresses the current expiry of the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003—TCPA—on 1 December 2021 by extending its operation for a further 10 years to ensure police continue to have the powers that they need to prevent and to respond to terrorist acts. Secondly, the bill implements recommendations 4, 5, 6 and 15 of the expert panel on terrorism and violent extremism prevention and response powers report 2 to create two pathways for early countering violent extremism intervention: a voluntary scheme and a civil court-based scheme. Thirdly, the bill establishes the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel to support the Secretary to the Department of Justice and Community Safety (DJCS) to administer the voluntary case management scheme and the support and engagement order scheme and to create a standalone CVE information-sharing scheme to facilitate the referral process and to ensure effective coordination of CVE interventions, as we have already heard from our lead speaker. Lastly, together the reforms will enable early intervention when individuals are at risk of radicalising towards violent extremism by providing programs and services to address the issues that may be contributing to such risk, such as isolation, social isolation, unemployment and drug and alcohol issues.

I know that there has also been a lot of work done in the prevention space. I remember from my time as a councillor in the City of Greater Dandenong some of the great work that took place in community harmony, enhancing social cohesion and promoting community harmony through our community groups and the many multicultural organisations in the City of Greater Dandenong. Can I say isolation is a big factor in potential radicalising and the consequences of radicalisation. This makes opportunities to share one’s culture, beliefs and experiences with others even more important. Through those opportunities we can develop a greater sense of trust and belonging among all Victorians. In doing so we have seen in Clarinda and across Victoria the minimising of social division, misunderstandings and isolation. Clarinda is a great example of multicultural Victoria and I believe a success story of multicultural Victoria. I am proud to be part of a government that continues to celebrate our diversity.

The context of those objectives and the bill includes section 38 of the TCPA, which requires a review of the act by 31 December 2020, and section 41, which provides it will expire on 1 December 2021. That provision must be amended or repealed before this date to prevent the automatic expiry of the TCPA. The Department of Justice and Community Safety conducted the TCPA review, which found that there is an ongoing need for the power in the act and broad support for the retention of the sunset clause and the review clause, which stakeholders generally viewing these provisions as important safeguards. I would just like to go through all of these safeguards in the remaining time.

The review was supported by an expert advisory group, bringing together judicial, policing and academic experts to provide guidance and advice to the department. An interdepartmental committee comprising representatives from DJCS, Victoria Police, the Department of Premier and Cabinet and the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing also provided input into policy development. There was also the counterterrorism legislation working group and the CVE policy working group, which comprise a wide range of stakeholders. There has been very broad consultation and the bill has broad support from those stakeholders, and I am happy to see that this consultation will continue throughout the implementation of the bill. This is appropriate given that the bill has been drafted with the intention of broad application across the radicalisation spectrum—namely, political, religious and ideological causes—and as such consultation with community stakeholders will also take place during the bill’s implementation to address concerns.

Again, I am proud to be part of this government, which is working to enable early intervention when individuals are at risk of radicalising, combating violent extremism and providing programs and services to address the issues that may be contributing to this extremism. I am also proud of my community in Clarinda, our diversity and social cohesion and the many community organisations which are key partners in supporting our strong and socially inclusive state. We will continue to foster and celebrate this diversity and be proud of our many cultures, beliefs and experiences which contribute so much to a vibrant Clarinda— (Time expired)

Mr McCURDY (Ovens Valley) (10:57): I rise to make a contribution on the Terrorism (Community Protection) Amendment Bill 2021, and I do so knowing how important it is that we try and cut off in their infancy extremism and tendencies by people to be swept up in the malicious pursuit of terrorism, and they do so on behalf of extreme groups. Ever since 9/11 in the USA the world has certainly worked a lot more closely together to stamp out terrorism. And we must never stop doing this—working together to stamp this out. The very fabric of our community, state and country relies for the most part on law-abiding citizens going about their day’s work, nurturing their families and being good local citizens. 9/11 is one of those moments about which all of us will remember where we were when we first heard the news. It was a significant moment in all of our lives. But terrorism is much, much more than 9/11. We do need to work hard. I am pleased to be speaking on this bill. Extremism defies logic and it harms innocent families, and for these reasons we will not be opposing this legislation.

The purpose of the bill is to introduce reforms to terrorism laws in Victoria by creating early intervention pathways and a multi-agency approach to address radicalisation towards violent extremism. It will do this by amending the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 and by making amendments to other acts, including the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005, the Health Records Act 2001, the Magistrates’ Court Act 1989 and other acts. It will also amend the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine Act 1985 to update a reference to a repealed act.

The main provisions are to establish the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel and to provide for the voluntary case management of those who are radicalising towards violent extremism or are at risk of doing so. It will also provide for the making of support and engagement orders to address the underlying causes of those who are radicalising towards violent extremism, expand the scheme that provides for the protection of counterterrorism intelligence and require a further review of the operation and delay the expiry of the act.

We know that following the siege in Brighton in 2017 the government appointed an expert panel on terrorism and violent extremism prevention and response powers. They were to review the operational effectiveness of Victoria’s laws to prevent, monitor, investigate and respond to acts of terrorism and violent extremism. Previously, the Justice Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2018 implemented legislative aspects of all 16 recommendations from the expert panel’s first report and recommendations 18 to 21 and 24 from its second report. This bill will implement recommendations 4, 5, 6 and 15 from the second report. These reforms complement existing powers that government and law enforcement agencies can utilise when a person is radicalised to the point where a terrorist attack is being planned or is about to occur. It is important that we, as I said, cut this off at the pass right in its early stages wherever possible.

The case management system will need to be reviewed after the first three years. Voluntary program participants would be referred to the Secretary of the Department of Justice and Community Safety by Victoria Police, and the informed consent of the participant would then be required. If the person is aged 10 to 14 years, the parent or guardian must give consent. Just to clarify, a court could make a finding of radicalising towards violent extremism on the basis of behaviour that the court finds has been engaged in by the person for a period of up to 12 months with a possible extension of a further 12 months, which includes possessing extremist material—that is, material that is encouraging, glorifying, promoting or condoning a terrorist act, that is seeking support for the carrying out of a terrorist act or that is produced or distributed by a terrorist organisation—and intimidating the public or a section of the public. There is other detail regarding the court findings, which I believe has been covered by other speakers, the member for Kew particularly. There has been wide consultation with many distinguished bodies, including but not limited to the commonwealth Attorney-General, Hugh de Kretser of the Human Rights Law Centre, the Victorian Bar, the Police Association Victoria and the University of Melbourne.

We certainly do not need terrorism in our country and in our communities. Australia has been touched by terrorism, particularly offshore, whether it was in Bali or the US or other destinations, and as it touches our shores we just need to do whatever we can as a community, as a state and as a country to prevent this wherever possible. Evidence has shown that extremism can start at a very young age in individuals, and if you let that fester and grow, well, we can see what the results can be. As I said, we do not need terrorism in our country. We have been through enough already in the last couple of years. We have seen so many people die from COVID that should never have died, because of a second-rate hotel quarantine system. It is important that as soon as we get to 80 per cent vaccination and beyond we do not have any more road bumps along the way, because small, medium and large businesses have been decimated through this lockdown—and lockdown after lockdown. In fact Melbourne is the lockdown capital of the world, a record that no city can be proud of. So when Victoria reopens and recovers and rebuilds through hard work from all Victorians, we do not need terrorism to poke its head up, as has happened in other countries.

The war on terror is not over, and we must play our part, as I said, as individuals in our own families and in our communities. If you see something, say something. If it is at the state level—not just as an MP but at a state level as a community member—or as a country, we need to make sure that we do whatever we can to get our communities back on track after COVID. We certainly do not want terrorism ruining our lives and the futures of our families, and we do want that normality back in our lives before we have a whole generation that is scarred for life, if they have not been already. With those brief words, I commend the bill to the house.

Ms THEOPHANOUS (Northcote) (11:03): I rise to speak in support of the Terrorism (Community Protection) Amendment Bill 2021. It is an incredibly sad truth that atrocious acts of terrorism and violent extremism continue to impact communities across the globe, including right here in Victoria. Australia’s current terrorism threat is set at ‘probable’, meaning that credible intelligence assessed by our security agencies indicates that individuals or groups continue to possess the intent and capability to conduct a terrorist attack in Australia. Unlike more prevalent types of high-impact offending, the probability of violent extremist incidents is low, but the seriousness and scale of the potential impact is disproportionately severe. Not only can these acts result in tragic injury and loss of life, they can also cause immeasurable damage to community cohesion, trust and the way we value diversity. Yet while governments and law enforcement agencies have the ability to intervene where an attack is planned or about to occur, there is currently no legislative mechanism to intervene earlier, when a person is radicalising towards violent extremism. This is very serious.

We know from ASIO’s latest threat environment assessment that some individuals in our community continue to be radicalised. Indeed the rise of social media platforms and the internet has made it easier to reach into people’s homes and minds to spread messages of hate, often targeting vulnerable individuals to take advantage of any sense of disempowerment or disenfranchisement. Heartbreakingly, we know that this online radicalisation is reaching younger and younger audiences. Indeed between 2014 and 2018, eight children under the age of 18 were charged with terrorism offences. This reflects around 10 per cent of people charged with these kinds of offences. The ASIO submission to the commonwealth Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security also identified that children as young as 13 and 14 are increasingly exposed to and consuming terrorist propaganda and are increasingly involved in offshore terrorism.

In recent years we have seen right-wing extremism in Australia become more active and well organised, currently comprising around one-third of the nation’s counterterrorism investigative subjects. Over the past two years in particular we have seen far-right groups seek to latch on to the current global pandemic to reinforce and spread their narratives. For example, during the recent violent protests in Melbourne’s CBD, counterterrorism experts were reported as saying that far-right activists had hijacked the opportunity and were directing, planning and egging on the protesters. ASIO has also told the current commonwealth joint intelligence and security committee that far-right movements are actively taking advantage of the pandemic to boost their own recruitment. The rise of these far-right groups is a global concern but also one that we need to take very seriously in Victoria. They have sought to put forward the narrative that the pandemic is proof of the conspiracies at the core of their ideologies—ideologies that lack coherence and seek to create division and instability that fulfil their own agenda of societal collapse under the guise of freedom from oppression.

I know that most Victorians condemn these organised far-right groups for what they are—violent extremists—but there are Victorians, whether they be disenfranchised, disadvantaged or just disgruntled and looking for a way to vent their anger, who hear these messages and may become radicalised. This puts our community at risk. It puts these people at risk. This is why it is so important that at every turn those of us in this house with a voice, with a platform, with a responsibility to our communities call out and condemn extremism and violence, including that associated with COVID-19 and the anti-science movement. ASIO itself has highlighted the importance of political leaders in this regard. It is critical that we refuse to give these far-right groups a platform. This includes by condemning conspiracy theories and anti-science narratives. It means instilling confidence in the science of vaccination and uniting Victorians to follow the health advice, not flirting with far-right groups or using their narratives to capitalise on the hardships and fears of Victorians. Too often I have heard divisive and corrosive commentary from those opposite, and the member for Frankston spoke to this as well. We have a responsibility as leaders in our communities to not fuel this thinking.

This is very close to home now. It is on our streets, and it is in our suburbs. Just a few weeks ago a group of these anti-science protesters rioted through my electorate of Northcote, frightening families and children at a playground in All Nations Park and eventually barging into Northcote Plaza, where they terrified business owners and locals, causing everyone to shut their doors early and the whole area to be locked down by police. Just a little time before that we saw despicable acts of cowardice and violence directed at our nurses and healthcare workers at a CBD vaccination site, where they were spat at and harassed for doing their job. As I said, this is very close to home.

For some, heartbreakingly, extremist views have embedded in the mindset of a family member or a friend. When individuals get pulled into this world and go down this rabbit hole it can be very, very difficult to pull them back out. We know that radicalisation can be influenced by a number of factors in a person’s life which may put them at greater risk of being targeted by extremist messaging. Social isolation, mental health challenges, substance abuse, unemployment and other complex risk factors all contribute, and while our efforts to counter violent extremism have rightly focused on detecting and disrupting terrorist attacks, early intervention to prevent this radicalisation also has a central role to play in keeping our communities safe.

Existing research into violent extremism indicates that it is most effective to address the broader needs of people being radicalised or at risk of being radicalised before attempting to address their extremist views or ideologies. What this bill delivers is a framework to wrap supports around these individuals and address these underlying risk factors by establishing two early intervention pathways and helping them to disengage. The amendments implement key recommendations from the Expert Panel on Terrorism and Violent Extremism Prevention and Response Powers, which reviewed the operation and effectiveness of Victoria’s laws to prevent, investigate and respond to acts of terrorism and violent extremism. The expert panel’s report identifies gaps and barriers to early intervention. We have legislative tools to intervene and disrupt planned terrorist attacks, but how do we intervene before someone gets to that point? How do we help people who are vulnerable to extreme ideologies and support them to go down a different path? Diverting people away from radicalisation does not mean simply telling someone they are wrong and they must change or immediately resorting to criminal justice interventions. It means therapeutic interventions and case management to address the underlying factors they may be facing, like disengagement from school or work, and building up their connections with family and community.

Under this bill, as I said, there will be two pathways. The first pathway is a voluntary case management scheme implementing recommendation 4 of the expert panel’s second report. This pathway will be used where individuals consent to receive support, and it is the preferred option. The second pathway is a court-based scheme implementing recommendation 15 of the expert panel’s second report. This will allow Victoria Police to seek a support and engagement order, or SEO, where an individual will not participate voluntarily. Where an SEO is made, that individual will be required to participate in programs which address their underlying risks in accordance with an approved case management plan tailored to their needs.

Importantly, both schemes are designed to only be used when a person is, or is at risk of, being radicalised towards violence as a means of advancing political, religious or ideological causes. It will not target radical belief or thought alone. To support the creation of these new pathways, we will also establish a statutory framework for the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel, who will be responsible for assessing and case managing individuals in both the schemes, and we will establish an information-sharing scheme to support the functions of the panel and service providers. Critically, we are also protecting Victorians against the misuse of information through the introduction of an offence for unauthorised sharing of protected information. This bill also makes amendments to the act to extend its sunset clauses and its review clauses, recognising that the bill does enable significant powers.

Terrorism and violent extremism continue to pose a very real threat to our community, and so protecting the lives of Victorians and the social cohesion of our society is one of the most fundamental responsibilities we have as a government. So this bill recognises the importance of this work and the need for early intervention to prevent that escalating radicalisation, and for those reasons I commend the bill to the house.

Mr McGUIRE (Broadmeadows) (11:13): We are confronting the catastrophes of our times. Causes of the pandemic, terrorism and inequality define how our lives and livelihoods are intertwined. To save lives from terrorism and deliver community protection, we need a coordinated strategy across the three tiers of government, simultaneously harnessing our political, economic and social policies and agencies to prevent terrorism.

This legislation is an Australian first. Importantly, its focus is on early intervention, addressing causes leading to radicalisation to prevent terrorism. It extends Australia’s response to the world’s deadliest terror attack, the cataclysm the world defines as 9/11. Significant days in world history turn fate, as 9/11 did 20 years ago, when death was orchestrated to strike fear into our lives. In another recent twist of fate, the Taliban are back in charge of Afghanistan despite America’s and Australia’s longest war to defeat them. Violent extremism extended to the Bali bombings, killing 88 Australians in 2002, and the mass shooting killing 51 people praying in mosques in Christchurch.

The echoes of history are heard in our communities. Right-wing extremism and place-based disadvantage must be simultaneously addressed to prevent radicalisation leading to terrorism. To avoid people becoming isolated, marginalised and radicalised we must have leadership uniting communities, not dividing them by exploiting ‘us and them’ attitudes; build social infrastructure; and harness technology for the public good to create opportunity, especially in postcodes of disadvantage. Investigation from an expert panel that led to this legislation was instigated following a siege in Brighton—a sunshine suburb.

The key features of this bill are that it amends the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 to address a range of these concerns by establishing the countering violent extremism voluntary case management scheme, creating the support and engagement order scheme to address the underlying causes of people being radicalised and moving towards violent extremism—this is extremely important, that we actually go to the causes, connect the disconnected and make sure they feel part of our community so they are less susceptible to radicalisation; establishing a statutory framework for the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel and establishing a standalone information-sharing scheme to support the functions of the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel.

Now, this is really important, because you need to have the various arms of government and the three tiers talking to each other, exchanging their intelligence, because you need to know what is happening in these little communities. From whatever side of politics is irrelevant: you need to see how people can be susceptible, can be marginalised and then can be radicalised.

The amendments in this bill expire within weeks, so we need to provide a further 10 years to ensure police continue to have the powers they need to prevent and respond to terrorist acts. That is by extending the previous act. The amendments will implement key recommendations from the Expert Panel on Terrorism and Violent Extremism Prevention and Response Powers, and I want to congratulate everybody involved. I do note that Ken Lay, the former Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police—and I know he served in Broadmeadows; we have had many a discussion about these issues and how to address them—was on that panel as well.

There are other amendments as well that are of significance, but I do want to touch on that the expert panel recommended:

That the Victorian government refer to an appropriate inter-jurisdictional body consideration of amendments to the legal definition of a ‘terrorist act’ to:

remove motive as an essential element of that definition.

This arose from the expert panel’s concern that:

… restricting the legislative definition of a ‘terrorist act’ to an act motivated by a political, religious or ideological cause—

may expose—

… the community to the danger of a terrorist act motivated by something other than politics, religion or ideology.

I think that is an important understanding. The expert panel also noted further risks, including the risk that an act may erroneously be classified as terrorism because the perpetrator is of a specific religious background or that an act superficially done in the name of a religion but ultimately unconnected in any meaningful way to the practice of that religion may be labelled as a terrorist act despite being below the proper threshold. The expert panel noted that:

The damage to community cohesion in these circumstances could be significant.

So that is why I am making the call that we need leadership at a political level that unites communities and does not divide them. That is the absolute understanding that we should have about how what happens in these suburbs affects all of us. The committee also noted that the risks of removing the motive element include that it may lead to more incidents being classified as terrorist acts, and the example they cited was mental health incidents. They raise public anxiety if more acts are classified as terrorist acts, create a lack of clarity as to what a terrorist act is, allow expansion of extraordinary police powers to incidents not involving terrorism and create inconsistency with other jurisdictions that rely on the definition. In light of these risks and issues the Victorian government determined not to amend the definition of a terrorist act.

In summing up I really want to look at what has been done to address these issues. This is an outstanding piece of legislation. I am glad that the opposition are supporting it. It was good to hear that we understand we need to bring all of our forces to bear—political, economic and social. I just want to put on the record that on 28 January, just after Australia Day, in 2015, I actually wrote to the Honourable Scott Morrison, then Minister for Social Services, to try and bring these issues together. I highlighted that this is what we need to do—for the Australian government to become a partner in the global learning village to coordinate better results for the community and a more efficient use of taxpayers money. I pointed out that unemployment in Broadmeadows at that time was 26.4 per cent, higher than Spain and equal to Greece. Youth unemployment was precariously high, and there was a looming social disaster that would only deteriorate when the Ford Motor Company closed. So this was before Ford closed. I was highlighting that Broadmeadows is also the capital of Melbourne’s north.

I remember subsequent newspaper articles. The Australian Financial Review, under Laura Tingle, summed it up with the most unlikely headline in the paper’s history, I would argue: ‘Malcolm Turnbull’s terror response needs less Thucydides and more Broadmeadows’. The political editor, Laura Tingle, highlighted the gap in Australia’s anti-terrorism response: disadvantage as a cause of alienation. She commented—this was in the wake of the Paris attacks—that this is what we needed to do. We have got the plan, we have got the opportunity. Now we have had record investments from the Australian government and from the Victorian government in response to the pandemic. How we bring this together where it is needed most in these communities is the plan. Creating Opportunity: Postcodes of Hope in 2016 defined that. I refer to that report and also the recent one, the Comeback strategy for Broadmeadows, which has the unanimous support of the Broadmeadows Revitalisation Board 4.0.

This is meant as a prototype that we can harness for these other communities to make sure that they are all connected, that people do feel a part of the prosperity of Australia—what a fantastic country we have. On how we actually do that now, I think this legislation gives us a great framework of reference to build on. It is now up to us as community leaders, particularly in this time, to unite people, to bring them together and say, ‘Here’s where you fit into the big picture of Australia. You are part of this community’ and to deliver hope. That is what this bill does, and I commend it to the house.

Ms RICHARDS (Cranbourne) (11:23): I am very pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the Terrorism (Community Protection) Amendment Bill 2021. I do it with my usual sense of optimism, but wouldn’t it be terrific if we did not need anything like this? Wouldn’t it be terrific if we could rely on inclusion and people’s goodwill? But we do need to take action, as we always do, to protect the community, to keep everyone safe.

We are living in an increasingly integrated economy. These past 20 months have been testament to just how integrated our communities are. This interconnectedness of our society through telecommunications, through courier services and free trade has changed the way we all see the world, and it is such a different place. We see it as just that—a globally interconnected network where our state, country and community are just part. Now, these last 20 or so months have been a testament to how the economy, the level of wealth and socio-economic and sociocultural diversity have developed from that intermingling. Alongside this prosperity a rise of ideological imperatives that supersede national and in fact state borders is evident. In cases where this breeds violence and hate, it means that a greater range of preventative measures may be required to necessitate that Victoria is part of a cooperative approach to counterterrorism.

In response to the commonwealth anti-terrorism laws, which can be found in the Criminal Code Act 1995 and regulations, Victoria enacted the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 to cover those areas where Victoria continued to have legislative responsibility. Based on the Harper-Lay review in 2014 to 2017 this bill extends the sunset clause of the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act. This bill establishes the countering violent extremism voluntary case management scheme and it creates the support and engagement order (SEO) scheme to address the underlying causes of people radicalising towards violent extremism. It establishes a statutory framework for the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel and establishes a standalone information-sharing scheme to support the function of the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel. We are doing this to ensure that we are working with the commonwealth to protect the Victorian community. That has a bit of a theme, but in this case it is against violent extremism. These measures that aim to identify and stop terrorism where it begins to rear its head are absolutely critical.

The growth and organisation of right-wing extremism has become clear in previous years. These dangerous organisations are becoming more sophisticated, more ideological and certainly more active. Conspiracies that manipulate the anxieties of the community surrounding COVID-19 have created a pipeline for genuine concern about extreme radicalism. Make no mistake: there are people who orchestrate the radicalisation of ordinary Australians, using people’s desire for community, connection and a narrative to base their beliefs to serve their own interests of growing their so-called movements.

I want to remind people in this place that fascism and racial vilification are failed ideologies and ideologies of sorrow, regret and pain for both those who engage and fuel those dangerous ideologies and those who fall victim to the materialisation of these ideas. This is an ideology of loss and of agony. It is important to call fascism what it is. The voluntary case management and SEO schemes will improve community safety by intervening early when an individual is at risk of radicalisation or radicalising others. We do know that support, tolerance and a real sense of belonging will give people exactly what they need, and that drives them away from dread. These conspiracies expose ordinary good-hearted Victorians to demonstrably false assumptions about their neighbours, colleagues and friends, and only seek to sow fear and hatred in the communities they claim to protect.

I would like to raise one of my favourite topics, and that is the inherent goodness I see in so many community members. After the horrors of the Christchurch attack many of us acted in solidarity by visiting the local mosques. I arrived, I think, two mornings after the terrorism in Christchurch, at the local mosque. The mosque was due to open at 10 o’clock in the morning. The Minister for Prevention of Family Violence was also there to visit. And so just before 10 o’clock, as we pulled into the car park we noticed that the car park was full, and out of a series of cars leapt the Sikh volunteers and other members of the Sikh faith. What I thought at the time was that out of the terror of something as obscene as the Christchurch attack you saw what I believe to be the best of the community that I represent. The instinct of the Sikh volunteers is well known now. So many people in Victoria, in Australia and in fact around the world know that when there is a bushfire, they drive towards the fire in support of people; that when there is a crisis like we have endured with COVID, the very clever engineers develop very quickly a system of food drop-off that is safe and efficient. But before everyone else had heard about the Sikh volunteers, before they were covered internationally for the way that they approach humanity, before they supported people through the bushfires, I saw that instinct that day after the Christchurch attacks when they arrived at the mosque. They walked in, and I would like to recognise Jasbir as asking if he could join together with the imam in prayer. All of the members of the Sikh faith from the community I represent were there at the mosque, side by side in solidarity, shoulder to shoulder, and they joined in prayer and in sorrow. That is a response that goes against the ideals of the radical anti-Semitic racist minority who are very dangerous.

At the beginning of last year I learned of some anti-Semitic graffiti at a very important golf club in Cranbourne—a golf club that was established actually in response to anti-Semitism experienced by the Jewish community a long time ago, not long after the war. The golf club is a place of inclusion and a place where people come together to play golf of course but also come together to celebrate the importance of inclusion. When we learned of the anti-Semitic graffiti at the golf club, we called together some local community members: a local Buddhist, a member of the Buddhist faith, who was on one of the Buddhist Council’s peak bodies; Jasbir, again, from the Sikh Interfaith Council; the local Uniting Church minister, who put on his collar, Ray McCluskey—a very good man; a member of the Cardinia Interfaith Network; a man who represents the Muslim faith; and a Hindu woman, Meha Nanthie. They joined together within hours of learning of the anti-Semitic graffiti. They joined together and made a statement of solidarity. What they wanted to do was to make sure not just that the golf club had a sense of how important it was in the community but that the golf club’s experiences of anti-Semitism were absolutely called out. The many other faith communities in the area wanted to make this statement of solidarity.

So when we see the worst of people, the worst ideologies, we know that one statement that is ideologically abhorrent can be responded to with a really significant faith community response which is of inclusion and calling it out—not just watching it, not observing it, but actually calling it out. That is what we do. That is why this state is the most successful multicultural state in this most successful multicultural country. As the member for Cranbourne, I commend this bill, but I also commend the acts of inclusion. This is really important. I commend the bill to the house.

Following speech incorporated in accordance with resolution of house of 7 October:

Mr HAMER (Box Hill)

I would like to begin my comments on the Terrorism (Community Protection) Amendment Bill 2021 by acknowledging a deeply concerning trend in our community.

Over recent years we have seen a disturbing pattern in our community: the rise of extremism, particularly right-wing extremism. It’s not just an issue in Victoria, but indeed across the globe.

Call it what you want: the alt-right, the white nationalist, the neo-Nazis. These people spew disgusting hate through their words and actions. The consequences extend far beyond the darkest corners of the dark web into the lives of Victorians.

Often, this disgusting hatred is rooted in anti-Semitism. Wild conspiracies become the justification for violent extremism. It is shameful, and it has no place in Victoria, or indeed on the face of this planet.

In recent months the Legal and Social Issues Committee handed down its final report into our anti-vilification measures in Victoria. I commend the bipartisan committee for their excellent work investigating what we can do as a government to better protect Victorians.

The committee’s findings were damning. The committee heard directly from the chairman of the Anti-Defamation Commission, Dvir Abramovich, who highlighted that current levels of anti-Semitism in Victoria are unprecedented, and this vicious hatred has spread across society. Our schools, our workplaces, our streets—all are now places of vilification.

It would be wrong to think that anti-Semitic extremism is something of the past. This vitriol is something Jewish communities in our state face every day.

I am proud to be a member of a government that has committed to becoming the first jurisdiction in Australia to ban the public display of Nazi symbols, which will help in countering this surge in extremism.

But we must do more, and the Andrews government is committed to that. In Victoria, we already have legislation to stop violent terror attacks before they happen—but we have no legislative mechanisms to deradicalise individuals before that point is reached.

The bill being debated by the house today is set to change that for good, by creating the means to stop the process of radicalisation.

It does this by establishing the Countering Violent Extremism Multi-agency Panel, or CVEMAP, and a standalone information-sharing tool to coordinate CVEMAP’s work.

We know that early intervention is critical, and that no one journey of radicalisation is the same. However, CVEMAP brings together a range of government and law enforcement agencies to support these individuals.

Importantly, there is a significant focus on addressing the underlying causes driving the individual towards violent extremism. Whether that be addressing housing challenges, unemployment or social disengagement, CVEMAP will be able to help, providing the wraparound supports these individuals need.

This new framework will create two streams of early interventions for Victorians at risk or already in the process of radicalisation.

Firstly, Victorians can be referred to CVEMAP and engaged with on a voluntary, consensual basis in the event they are determined suitable for interventions.

Secondly, Victoria Police will be able to apply to the Magistrates Court or Children’s Court for a support and engagement order, or SEO. If the court finds the individual in question is indeed radicalising, the SEO requires compliance with the CVEMAP program. These orders can be made if individuals fail to engage voluntarily, or if Victoria Police identifies them as being at serious risk of radicalisation.

Crucially, this decision to apply for an SEO will be assessed on a case-by-case basis, and failure to engage with the voluntary program does not automatically result in Victoria Police applying for an SEO.

I cannot emphasise enough the importance of this bill and these counter-radicalisation measures we are debating today. These measures will make a real and valuable impact—saving lives, stopping divisive hatred and reversing the spiral to violent extremism.

It looks for red flags which , for too long, have not been acted upon as early as they could have been. These behaviours include making and disseminating extremist material, endorsing statements which support the commissioning of violence or association with existing violent extremists. Each of these risk factors is a warning sign that someone is on the path to violent extremism, and it is our responsibility to put measures in place to stop this process when a risk threshold is reached.

The COVID-19 pandemic has fuelled these trends of radicalisation. As we go through these unprecedented events, members of the community are turning to extremism in record numbers. Radicalising behind closed doors, posing a threat to our peaceful way of life.

In the words of radicalisation expert Professor Peter Neumann, radicalisation refers to ‘everything that happens before the bomb goes off’. As a government, it is incumbent upon us to act in this critical window—and reverse this process before it is too late.

However, in the event an act of violent extremism is imminent, it is critical that law enforcement agencies have the power to act.

That’s why the bill we are debating today extends the operation of the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 for a further 10 years, after a comprehensive review of the act by stakeholders and experts from the fields of national security, counterterrorism, law and justice.

We know in recent years violent extremism, and especially right-wing extremism, has grown significantly as a threat to our way of life. Our peaceful democratic society is under threat more than ever before.

That’s why the extension of the act is critical and why the government is convinced this legislation continues to be required to protect all Victorians. The mechanisms being extended are proportionate to the risks we are facing, and the dangers we must confront. If we don’t extend this legislation, it would otherwise lapse on 1 December—leaving our law enforcement agencies without the tools they need to do their vital work.

The face of terrorism is changing, and right-wing extremism is posing a growing threat. As the dynamics of the threat change, so must the legislation we have in place. It is for this reason we are introducing deradicalisation measures and why this Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 will be reviewed again in seven years time.

The Andrews government is committed to getting this legislation right and to looking at future improvements we can make to better protect Victorians from violent extremism, including right-wing extremism.

Whether that is by extending the operation of our terror laws and introducing measures for deradicalisation today, or our commitment to ban Nazi symbols and strengthen anti-vilification laws, I am proud to be part of a government that protects our peaceful society and way of life.

Because all Victorians deserve to be safe from the horrors of extremism, in all its forms.

I commend this bill to the house.

Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (11:33): I move:

That the debate be now adjourned.

Motion agreed to and debated adjourned.

Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day.

Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Mr PEARSON:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Mr FOWLES (Burwood) (11:34): It is my great pleasure to make a contribution to the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021. I would like to thank the former minister, the member for Narre Warren North, for his work and the work of his department in bringing this bill to the house, and I would like to congratulate the member for Richmond on the inclusion of this very important portfolio, the portfolio of child protection, in his significant portfolio responsibilities.

This is a bill that is about creating a new, contemporary approach to supporting vulnerable children and families. In addition to that, it advances self-determination for Aboriginal children and strengthens the supports that are available to children who are at risk. This is an area that is very, very important to members of this government. Those of us who are on this side of the chamber—I think any of us—can recount stories that related to us, or we have been tangentially involved in or perhaps even directly involved in, of very, very difficult and challenging circumstances where particularly kids in need have had to have involved in their lives various government agencies to assist them and their families. It is typically in very, very difficult circumstances that those interventions are required, and it is important always that we have the right legislative framework for that and the right governmental response available for kids who find themselves in those very, very challenging circumstances.

I will take the house through an outline of the legislation, and then I want to talk, importantly, about one particular charity that do a lot of work in this space and their leadership team and talk a bit about the really sensational contribution they have made to child protection and child welfare matters in this state. But first, just to break it down, this is about, as I have said, modernising the legislative framework. It is about that early intervention. It is very, very important that we intervene. I was fond in my commercial life before entering this place of saying to staff that no problem ever got smaller through being ignored, that problems only get bigger and that the best way to deal with problems is to own them and jump on them. The same holds true for government—when there are problems out there, the single best way to address those problems is through early intervention. It does not matter whether it is in the health domain or the education domain, the crime and justice domain or indeed the child protection domain, it is very, very important that we intervene early when the warning signs are there, when the opportunity is there, to perhaps steer people onto a different path.

The other thing that these amendments do is elevate the rights of the child. Importantly and significantly, these amendments advance Aboriginal self-determination and self-management, and I will come to some of those matters later. They promote permanency for children by reducing adversarial court proceedings and in all strengthen the protections within the system. I want to commend the previous minister for his work in making sure that the child protection responsibilities of the government do not cease immediately upon a child attaining the age of 18. Tragically for a very extended period of time we had a set of circumstances where sometimes children were actually being in effect or in actuality evicted into homelessness halfway through their VCE year. It is staggering when you think about it, but we actually had circumstances where kids were reaching 18, were therefore unable to be cared for by the state or a range of other agencies and would find themselves potentially suddenly homeless not just at 18, which is still an age of some vulnerability, but in the middle of year 12. That of course is massively disruptive and risks in a sense tearing up all the good work that had been done to support that child to even get to that point. I am delighted that the minister has made that reform to raise that age to 21 years. I think that is an entirely appropriate response—that we recognise that kids who are at school, even if adults, are really still schoolkids. Yes, they might have reached the age of maturity, but they have a set of needs relating to their studies that mean that they are simply not going to be in a position in, I would have thought, almost all cases to be able to suddenly provide for their own subsistence—their needs, their accommodation, their food and everything else—in addition to trying to complete a full-time schooling load. I think that has been a very good and a very important reform.

I want to just spend a little bit of time talking about an organisation called Kids Under Cover. Kids Under Cover is an organisation I have had a lot to do with over the course of the last 10 years. They are a terrific organisation. They prioritise the retention of the family unit. Frequently in foster care environments you have kids of different ages and you have kids coming in and out of that foster care arrangement. Additionally, you have some other families, often blended families, where as kids get a bit older, as they enter their middle and late teenage years, the difficulties of all being under the one roof, being contained in the one environment, become more extreme and lead potentially to conflict. Kids Under Cover has done extraordinary work by building self-contained studios, largely in the backyards of those families—be they foster care families, and I have visited a number of them, or be they families who are experiencing some internal distress—and that has allowed those kids to stay connected to the family home. These are studios that do not have kitchens, so they still have to meet together to eat, but they become extraordinary depressurisation mechanisms. The ability for these older kids to retreat to their own space, to have their own study space, to have their own sleeping space, to have the ability to be not necessarily living on top of one another, potentially in cramped circumstances, and to have that space to call their own has been transformational, life changing, for so many of those families.

I want to take the opportunity to talk briefly about my friend Jo Swift. Jo is an extraordinary woman. She has been with Kids Under Cover for some 19 years, and I know the minister at the table, the Minister for Health, is a fan of her work as well. She has done really incredible work, and I think now some 900 families have been assisted over her journey with Kids Under Cover; 900-odd families have been assisted by the provision of the studios. In those circumstances it is incredible how big a difference that makes, because not only do Kids Under Cover allow the family to stay together, providing a direct and positive benefit to that family, but there is an ancillary benefit to the state in that that means often those kids do not then end up in some other form of care that perhaps the state has to resource. So the work of Kids Under Cover has been terrific work. The work of Jo Swift, an outstanding leader, who runs a terrific organisation, in and for Kids Under Cover over the last 19 years has been absolutely terrific. I do not know if the minister at the table knows this: she steps down in December after a very long stint at the helm of that organisation. Nineteen years it has been, and we wish her every single success in her journey to follow. I think I can extend, perhaps on the minister’s behalf, the gratitude of a grateful state, a grateful department and grateful Victorians for all the work that she has done. It really is magnificent work. I want to convey my personal thanks as well to her and the Kids Under Cover organisation for every bit of just terrific work they have done. They are a sensational organisation. For those following along at home, kuc.org.au is where you can go to make your donations to that fine, fine organisation.

In the 70-odd seconds that I have left to me, I do want to briefly mention the Wungurilwil Gapgapduir: Aboriginal Children and Families Agreement. This is a landmark partnership between the Aboriginal community, government and the child and family services sector, and it is all about better outcomes for Aboriginal children and young people. This bill advances a number of the commitments that were made in that process. Part of it meets the Closing the Gap national agreement target to reduce the rate of over-representation of Aboriginal children in care by 45 per cent by 2031. We know we have a problem, we know that Aboriginal children are radically over-represented in state care, and we have a very firm goal now of reducing that by 45 per cent over the course of the next 10 years. We would love of course for that over-representation to not exist at all. We accept that there is a huge amount of work required. This is an important goal, a goal that we should all commit ourselves to achieving and a goal that I think all of the house would agree is a goal worth striving for. I am grateful for the opportunity, and I commend the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill to the house.

Mr WALSH (Murray Plains) (11:44): I rise to make a contribution on the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021. Can I just for the record, for a start, remind the member for Burwood that care for the Aboriginal community in working with the Aboriginal community in our electorates is not the exclusive right of that side of the house. Quite a lot of our MPs on this side of the house have—

Mr Foley: I don’t think he ever claimed it was.

Mr WALSH: He did. We have significant Aboriginal communities in a lot of our electorates, which we all work very, very closely with and we grew up with, and they are just part of our community.

I suppose this particular bill does some work about the over-representation particularly of Aboriginal children in the system. Can I from the start as a local member put on the record my thanks to the staff and the departments that we work with when these issues come up. They are there to help, and we all go into public life to make sure we get better outcomes for the people that we represent, and it is important that the departments work with the local MPs to achieve those particular outcomes.

In my contribution I would like to focus on, as the Shadow Minister for Aboriginal Affairs for the coalition, the Liberal-National parties, actually delivering on-the-ground outcomes for Aboriginal families in Victoria. There is a lot of talk about Closing the Gap, about the First Peoples’ Assembly and working on treaty, but what I see day to day in my office in Echuca and what a number of our other regional MPs see as well is actually making sure we get the resources on the ground for Aboriginal families to improve the outcomes that are in the Closing the Gap indicators.

It is about having a safe house. In my office we regularly get, particularly, young Aboriginal women who are fleeing domestic violence who really struggle to get a house. It is at that point in time when a woman makes a choice to leave an abusive relationship that they are at their most vulnerable, and it is important that we can actually get a house quickly for them and their children. That is a real challenge at times, because there is not the housing stock available in the communities. If they have to relocate a significant distance away from their own community, they lose that family support that they would normally have had, when they are in this very, very traumatic part of their life. Their children have to leave their schools and go somewhere else as well, and that is also traumatic for the children. So in the Closing the Gap indicators it is about having better housing options for families.

It is about getting better education outcomes for Aboriginal children. There are very good social and economic indicators that the better the education anyone gets, the better the job they will get, the better the income they will earn, the better the housing options they will have in the future, the better the health outcomes they will actually have because they have a better paying job and the greater their life expectancy. That goes right across the community, but unfortunately Aboriginal students are not achieving the year 12 attainment rates that the rest of the community in Victoria here enjoy. So it is about making sure there is investment in the education system so that Aboriginal children get that better education. And once they get that better education it is making sure they actually get better employment opportunities.

As I spoke about, the better the employment opportunities a young person gets, the higher the salary they earn through the rest of their lives, the better the outcomes for their families, and it actually becomes a self-repeating process. If the family actually attains that higher rate of income, better housing, better jobs, better health outcomes, that flows on and they increase expectancy and their commitment to their children achieving the same thing. So it is very important that we actually have those employment opportunities that come out of having that education and a stable home to do it.

So this issue about the over-representation of Aboriginal children in the system is something that I think we all who come to this house have a commitment to improving, and I know on behalf of the Aboriginal communities that I represent and the Aboriginal health services particularly that deliver services to those communities we do want to see better outcomes. It is something that I have met with the First Peoples’ Assembly a number of times to talk about—the process going forward.

One of the concerns that I have as shadow minister is that within government there is a very siloed response to issues for the Aboriginal community. There is not necessarily an overarching group that looks at pulling all those things together. So if we approach around issues of education, it is the Department of Education and Training that delivers those particular outcomes. If we approach around issues in the health sector, it is the Department of Health, not Aboriginal Victoria, that actually delivers on those particular things. So the response to a number of these issues that we find we are talking about with this particular bill is very siloed within government, and there is no overarching responsibility to actually pull it all together to get a better outcome for Aboriginal children, for Aboriginal families, in this state.

What we would like to see from our side of the house is actually getting the Aboriginal services within government all brought together within one department and with one focus on making sure that there is actually a joined-up, linked response to the issues that we see; making sure that there is better housing, because some housing is delivered through the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing and some is delivered through Aboriginal affairs; and better outcomes from an educational point of view, because most of the issues are delivered through the department of education without the lens of the other things that contribute to making sure children actually attend school and you do not have the truancy issues that quite often happen. Equally the same with the health outcomes for Aboriginal families: we want to make sure that they are all joined up and that Aboriginal health services within our communities actually have the resources necessary to deliver those health services.

We have a major issue at the moment, where the vaccination rates in the Aboriginal community are lower than in the rest of the community here in Victoria, and that is putting at risk the lives and the health of the Aboriginal community. We recently had the CEO of the health service in Mildura expressing concerns about, I suppose, vaccination hesitancy—a lack of trust in the health system here in Victoria—from some in the Aboriginal community about going and rolling their sleeve up and getting the jab. So we need the government to be doing more work on making sure that the Aboriginal community actually are getting vaccinated and we get the vaccination rates up to protect them from hospitalisation and tragically from the risk of fatality from COVID.

I would like to see the Victorian government join the services together, actually focus on delivering real outcomes for the Aboriginal community in Victoria, so we do not have to have legislation like this, where we are actually dealing with over-representation in the justice system and the problems that we see with the Aboriginal community. Let us all make sure that the government focuses on outcomes rather than headlines, rather than press releases, rather than effectively platitudes without actually delivering on the ground, because as I said at the start of this contribution, we see in our offices the impacts on the Aboriginal community of not having sufficient housing in their community, not having a joined-up system from a health delivery point of view and not having the support mechanisms to make sure that Aboriginal students actually attain school outcomes similar to the rest of the community here in Victoria.

The Liberal-Nationals support the changes in this particular piece of legislation, but we would like to see more things done. In some ways this legislation is treating the symptom rather than treating the cause. If we had those better outcomes for Aboriginal children around education, around housing, around health outcomes, we would not necessarily find as many of them represented in the system as they are at the moment.

Mr EDBROOKE (Frankston) (11:53): It is a pleasure to rise this morning and speak on the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021. I will start off by thanking the minister and her staff but also the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing, who assisted in the writing of this very important bill.

I think I have said this many times before in this place, but we can judge ourselves on how we treat those more vulnerable people in our community, and I think you can reduce that statement down to: we can judge who we are and how good we are at it by how we treat the children in our community as well. This bill goes a long way to show Victorians how this Labor government prioritises our youth and also to improve the systems we use.

The bill amends the provisions of the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005 for protecting children and providing community services for children and families, and it creates a contemporary rights-based legislative framework for support of vulnerable children and their families, to support self-determination for Aboriginal children and to streamline and strengthen the system that protects children.

Many people in the house may not be aware of this, but Frankston and the Mornington Peninsula have the largest population of people that identify as Indigenous or Torres Strait Islander outside of Alice Springs, and we have got a very proud community with a gathering place, Nairm Marr Djambana. We have also got First Peoples Health and Wellbeing, who have been kicking goals and punching well above their weight to ensure that our First Nations people have respectful access to proper medical facilities that are culturally appropriate as well.

Of course ensuring the safety of children is one of the most important things that a government can do, and I think it should reflect everyone’s aspirations in this house. We have seen unfortunately what happens when the system does not work, and it is very, very unfortunate when you see that. As a former schoolteacher, it is heartbreaking to see a child not supported correctly by the system, when carers, when grandparents, when parents are unable to do so. We want our children to be in a position, regardless of their background, where they can grow and thrive and become fantastic members of our community, and this bill recognises that continuing responsibility that the state has to actually support young people into adulthood.

The bill progresses the Victorian government’s Roadmap for Reform: Strong Families, Safe Children, which I will now refer to as the road map. It establishes the blueprint for transforming the child and family system from a crisis response to an early intervention and prevention response, which reduces vulnerability and enables children to reach their full potential. Consistent with the road map, the bill enables greater activation of the whole child and family system responses to promote safety and wellbeing of all Victorian children and families and to uphold the right of all Victorian children to be safe and nurtured within positive, enduring relationships and to be supported to participate in the decisions that affect their lives.

Critically, and I would like to focus on this point, the bill focuses on the government’s commitment to reducing the over-representation of Aboriginal children and young people in care, which we know is a huge problem. It focuses on protecting the right of Aboriginal children to develop strong and positive cultural identity and advances the self-determination that we would all seek in the way that solutions are developed and delivered for and of course by Aboriginal Victorians. In the 2018 Wungurilwil Gapgapduir: Aboriginal Children and Families Agreement there was a landmark partnership established between the Aboriginal community, government and the child and family services sector to commit to better outcomes for Aboriginal children and young people. The bill advances those commitments and will provide a foundation for Victoria’s plan to meet the Closing the Gap national agreement, which was identified in that agreement. The rate of over-representation of Aboriginal children in care needs to be reduced by 45 per cent to the year 2031 under that agreement. It is incumbent upon us in this house to enable and empower our Aboriginal community and services to lead responses to achieve that target and of course aspire to better targets as well.

With these goals and aspirations firmly in the view of this bill, we will achieve the following important objectives on our way to those goals: we will modernise the legislative framework and enhance early intervention, prevention and diversion; we will elevate the right of the child; we will advance Aboriginal self-determination and self-management; we will promote permanency for children by reducing adversarial court proceedings and delays; and we will strengthen the system that protects our children. This bill will also make technical and clarifying amendments to enable the effective operation of the legislation.

This bill amends some terminology in the act. Currently there is terminology in the act which is gendered. The act applies language I guess perceived to be associated with criminal matters rather than child protection legal processes, and it includes those that are legacy terms from a time when child protection procedures mirrored summary criminal procedures. This contributes to an adversarial culture that adversely impacts engagement with children and families. The current bill achieves that language shift that we have been talking about by choosing terms that do not exclude people based on gender. I think everyone would be of the opinion in this house that it is very important whenever we are amending bills to actually go through those bills and reform them so they are not gender based, because I still think there is a lot of our legislation that probably has not been revised in that way.

It also changes terms to be more inclusive of different family types and Aboriginal cultural notions of family and community. Over the last decade I think I have never learned more about my local Aboriginal community than I have from those themselves that are members of Nairm Marr Djambana or First Peoples Health and Wellbeing. We have an incredible First Peoples culture in Australia, and it is one that is not appreciated at times and certainly does not take pride of place in our education system as it should. We celebrate Egyptians and pyramids in our curriculum. Nevertheless we have got a culture that was around—I am not sure of the exact dates—for 60 000 years. The world’s longest ongoing culture certainly has been around longer than the ancient Egyptians and pyramids, and it deserves our respect.

We are replacing terms commonly associated with criminal proceedings as well, wherever possible, with less stigmatising and easy-to-understand language. We are changing the term ‘case plan’ to ‘child safety and wellbeing plan’, and we are changing the term ‘out-of-home care’ to ‘alternative care’. That is responding to feedback from young people in care that the term ‘out-of-home care’ is problematic for them and that it suggests that young people have no home or cannot consider their placement a home as well. In addition, changing the term ‘secure welfare service’ to ‘secure care service’ ensures consistency with alternative care, reflecting the new therapeutic model of care, and responds to the concerns of some of our Aboriginal community controlled health organisations about the use of the term ‘welfare’ where it would not be seen as appropriate currently. Consistent with the shift to less criminalisation language, the bill also replaces the term ‘search warrant’ where it refers to a child at risk to ‘search and protect order’, and in doing so the bill actually implements recommendation 12 of the Commission for Children and Young People 2021 inquiry report Out of Sight, which called for the term ‘search warrant’ to be replaced with a term that is not associated with a criminal justice process, because in reality you would understand that it really is not a criminal justice process. These children have nothing to do with it. There is no criminal act there.

In conclusion, before I commend this bill to the house, I will go back to what I said at the very beginning of this bill, and that is that the way we treat our most vulnerable, including our children, reflects on who we are and what we want for the future. Certainly I stand here as a former teacher, and I have seen children that just needed that respect. The changes in this bill would have helped them in so many ways. This bill is a great bill. I want to thank the minister once again and also the minister’s team and the department for their formulation of this bill, and I commend it to the house.

Dr READ (Brunswick) (12:03): I rise to speak on the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021. This is a substantial bill that addresses the important issue of the rights and welfare of vulnerable children and families, particularly Aboriginal children and young people, who are over-represented in the child protection and out-of-home care systems, in the criminal justice system and in damaging solitary confinement. Unfortunately the government has provided only one week for consideration of one of the most detailed and important bills it will introduce in this Parliament, so today I am only going to speak on some key aspects of the bill and our overall position. We will have more to say when we have had an opportunity to study the bill in detail and consult with stakeholders, particularly the Aboriginal community.

There are a number of amendments in the bill that will improve the care of older children and young people, especially those aged between 17 and 21. The bill is codifying the Home Stretch program, which is something the Greens supported and in fact actually took to the 2018 election. We know that care and support should not just stop at 18. Young people increasingly live with their parents into early adulthood, getting both emotional support from the family and financial support from the bank of mum and dad. Yet for kids in the care system support is cut off at 18, so it is good to see a continued commitment to the Home Stretch program with these amendments, which create a responsibility for the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to provide a transition to adulthood allowance for care leavers.

The bill also increases the age at which statutory intervention can occur to protect a child from under 17 to under 18 years. This is designed to capture a gap where a 17-year-old might have left home and be in need of support and services but be too old for child protection services and too young for the adult service system. In these cases the gap in support means the 17-year-old is likely to experience homelessness and increased interactions with the justice system. The second-reading speech noted that these amendments reflect a modern understanding of the age of the child, and while the Greens are pleased to see these changes, this statement is a little disingenuous when the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005 will still allow children as young as 10 to be criminally responsible and sent to prison rather than have their behaviours and disadvantages addressed through therapeutic interventions. So even if passed, the bill misses an opportunity to ensure that all children in Victoria will be treated in a way that is consistent with current scientific understanding of childhood development. Also we know that so many of these vulnerable children are crossover kids—that is, they are involved in both the child protection and the criminal justice systems—and these kids are up to eight times more likely to be Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander children.

We know that the system of out-of-home care more often deals with children’s challenging behaviours through the criminal justice system and that once this occurs, particularly if children are detained in custody, usually on remand, it often results in irreparable lifelong trauma and damage to the children. So while the bill’s second-reading speech claims to elevate the rights of the child, the government should have taken the opportunity to also increase the age of criminal responsibility in the same bill, because of the medical evidence that preteenagers’ brains are still developing, especially in the areas of making judgements, impulse control and understanding the consequences of their actions, and also because most offenders in the 10 to 14 age group have a history of abuse, neglect, mental illness, cognitive impairment or other comorbidity. Raising the age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 14 would make the community safer, because reoffending occurs with more than 80 per cent of kids remanded under the age of 14. Nearly all the kids on remand—who are in custody and unsentenced—are never found guilty, and contact with the criminal justice system criminalises young children by exposing them to the influence of peers in the system and by the stigmatising effect of their involvement. It entrenches disadvantage, and as we have already discussed, Aboriginal and other disadvantaged groups are over-represented. Lastly, it is expensive, costing over half a million dollars per child per year, compared to $150 000 in the adult system. Amnesty International, the UN, the AMA and the paediatricians all endorse and call for the age of criminal responsibility to be raised in the Children, Youth and Families Act.

On a related matter, we also know that very often solitary confinement of children and young people and the resulting trauma occurs in youth detention and prisons, as was pointed out by the Ombudsman but not addressed in this bill. So there can be no genuine effort to uphold the rights of the child and actually promote long-term future health and social outcomes for children, their families and the community until we stop using the criminal justice system as a holding pen for vulnerable children.

It does not matter that we have not resourced and developed a more effective alternative therapeutic system, that we are waiting for some mythical national consensus on the issue or that the right political time has not arrived to introduce specific legislation. The Greens say we cannot wait for more children to be damaged, whether in out-of-home care, in custody or in solitary confinement. We need to make the commitment now to upholding the rights of all children, consistent with contemporary human rights. We say that there is more work to be done to make this happen. This is not a reason to wait. This is a reason to get to work, as has recently been announced in the Australian Capital Territory. While I have not touched on much of the bill today, the Greens will be moving amendments to the bill to raise the age of criminal responsibility, and to prohibit solitary confinement of children in state and correctional care, in the other place.

Mr WAKELING (Ferntree Gully) (12:10): I am pleased to rise to contribute to this important debate on the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021. Nothing could be more critical in terms of the operations of government than the protection of children, particularly those within our state who through no fault of their own, either through circumstance or through the effects of violence that has been perpetrated upon them by parents or guardians, find themselves in the horrendous situation of needing to be afforded care by the state. As someone who has been a member of the Family and Community Development Committee and participated in the child abuse inquiry, whilst not directly related to the child protection system it gave me a very clear understanding of the impact of abuse of children into their adulthood, and no-one can overestimate the impact that abuse on children will have on a child not only in their circumstances at that given time but into the months, the years and the decades beyond the actual incident. So it is imperative that governments do everything they can in their power to ensure we are doing what we can as a community to protect young people, and governments over the years have taken a range of actions, from the closures of facilities to allowing children to be raised in family arrangements as well as alternative therapeutic forms of care. Whilst parliaments have made great strides in improving the care of children in our child protection system, there is clearly more that can be done. I hope that the new Minister for Child Protection, who is responsible for this portfolio, will make it a key focus of their attention to protect children and to improve the system for protecting children. Victorians would expect nothing less of the minister responsible for child protection.

The bill does a range of things, which include the incorporation of the Home Stretch program, a program that the opposition clearly supported at the last election. It is pleasing to see that that important initiative has actually been picked up by the government to improve the benefits for children. My oldest child is turning 18 this year—in fact he is turning 18 next month—and the thought of him in a month’s time making a decision to leave home of his own free will and accord, whilst that is a decision for him to make as an 18-year-old, it is a decision that he is not forced to make. He, like many others of that age, will choose to remain in his family setting, but unfortunately in the child protection system young people of that age were not afforded that opportunity to stay with the family that was caring for them for the purposes of continued funding. They could obviously remain in a family setting. But the family would effectively have to care for that person without the assistance of government support, and for a range of reasons that was not always the case for families to continue that level of care without financial assistance—which is completely understandable. So we had the worst of all worlds, where young people on their 18th birthday were forced to leave a home with no guaranteed accommodation, and worse still, these children, many of whom would have no family support, no broader community support—suffering from trauma, suffering from mental illness, suffering from a range of other factors impacting on their lives—were being forced to make the terrible decision to actually find their own accommodation in many circumstances. And as you can appreciate, this would often lead to homelessness, to the effects of drugs and alcohol and unfortunately to ending up in the criminal justice system. So it is pleasing to see that the Home Stretch program is being continued, because we do not want to see children unnecessarily turfed out onto the street simply because when they turn 18 the state has made a decision that those persons should no longer be cared for. We know that this will make a difference, and it is important that this program is embedded into the system and support is provided for that cohort.

Whilst we have seen a range of other improvements in the system, there is still a lot more that needs to be done. Both as a member of Parliament and formerly as shadow minister for the portfolio of child protection I met with many carers, many parents, community organisations and sector representatives, who spelt out very clearly the frustrations in the system. We cannot fix everything, but we need to ensure we can do better, and I come back to the point I made earlier: with the appointment of a new minister, with the recent resignation of the former minister this week, it is imperative that we put a line in the sand, that the new minister makes child protection a key priority of this government and that we get a commitment from the new minister that they will make child protection a key priority in their portfolio responsibilities. We do not want to see young people end up in the criminal justice system.

It is always difficult to measure outcomes when it comes to child protection, because it is so difficult to actually identify success and failure. Is success or failure children going to university? Is success or failure children ending up with a trade? Is success or failure a child attaining year 12? Is success or failure a child attending school with reduced absenteeism? I mean, you cannot really assess it, because children will obviously respond in so many different ways. But one thing we can be focused on is the number of young people that end up in the criminal justice system who have been through the child protection system. That is an obvious test of whether or not we as a community are supporting young people.

I share concerns, like many in this house, on all sides of the house, about the rate of young people ending up in the criminal justice system. I would prefer to see a young person not in the criminal justice system than ending up in the criminal justice system. But it is not a blunt instrument. We simply cannot just say a child of a particular age will or will not be guilty of an offence, because what we have got to do is ensure that we are looking at what the underlying factors are that are causing young people to end up in the criminal justice system. Many young people through no fault of their own end up in the residential care system, and we know children in residential care are over-represented when it comes to involvement in criminal activity, leading to admission to the youth justice system.

So the critical issue is not so much what we are doing about young people in prison but more importantly: what are we doing as a society to stop young people ending up in residential care in the first place? Then we have got to look at why young people end up in residential care. It is not about the residential care system, it is about what important mechanisms have been put in place to stop young people being put into residential care in the first place. And then we ask ourselves: why is it that young people end up in child protection? Is it because we have failed as a community to adequately support the parents, the family, the mother or the father or whoever is caring for that child, to actually avoid that child ending up in the child protection system? It is not until we look at it holistically and identify the key factors that cause young people to end up in the child protection system—to see what we can do as a community and as a society to reduce the factors of young people ending up in child protection—that we are actually going to have a real effect in stopping young people who end up in residential care from ending up in the youth justice system. This is certainly an improvement, but as a community there is a lot more that we need to do.

Ms HUTCHINS (Sydenham—Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice, Minister for Victim Support) (12:20): I rise to speak on the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021. We have heard many speeches already here in Parliament about how important it is to protect children, and I wish to echo those sentiments. But actually actions are louder than words, and this government has invested historic amounts in funding and services which aim to give every child in Victoria the best start in life. Just last week we announced the rollout of $51.2 million for the mental health practitioner initiative. This includes the good news that it will be finalised by term 4 across our schools, a year earlier than originally committed to. This is just one of the dozens of initiatives that this government is implementing to ensure that children are safe and grow up resilient and connected.

Child protection and the justice system are very much, unfortunately, linked. In my ministerial role I see how important it is that children and their families are supported appropriately. Children who grow up in a safe and stable place to call home are more protected from encountering contact with the justice system. The intersection of child protection and youth justice is stark, and the cohort of children who are in contact with both systems are often referred to as ‘crossover kids’. I would like to say a few words about them and their situation. It is important to keep in mind when we are discussing these matters that behind each statistic lies a child, a family, a community and their stories of strength, hope and resilience. Fifty-seven per cent of young people in youth justice in 2018–19 received child protection services in the five years between 2014 and 2019. Whilst these figures are troubling, this over-representation is something faced by jurisdictions across the country, not just here in Victoria. A major report released last year by the Sentencing Advisory Council highlights the importance of child protection and youth justice working together to improve outcomes of the clients of these services. The report finds that children who are first sentenced at ages 10 to 13 years old are more likely to be known to child protection and more likely to be from an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander background. Additionally, children who have experienced residential care are more likely to be sentenced or diverted for certain offences, such as property damage or breaching an intervention order.

Reducing this gross over-representation is a massive priority for this government, and it has been a very big priority for me as Minister for Youth Justice over the last 14 months. This commitment is driven by a focus on diversion, early intervention and prevention. A key part of this framework is to reduce the criminalisation of young people in residential care. We have this new framework, which is a joint venture between youth justice, child protection, Victoria Police and our services to reduce unnecessary contact with police and the justice system by ensuring greater collaboration between the agencies. Can I say, since we have put this framework in place they have been doing an amazing job. Other actions that have commenced under the framework include supporting diversion and early intervention through the Children’s Court Youth Diversion Service and the youth justice group conferencing program and supporting the coordination of services. This is just one example of what we are doing. Another is the development of a youth justice bill, which I look forward to bringing to the Parliament in the coming months.

Whilst this government invests in programs which support young people to stay away from offending through its youth crime prevention grants, we also know it is better for young people, their families and the justice system as a whole if those risk factors are not there in the first place, so that we are tackling the root causes of crime. We know that often some of these causes start at home. I can say that unfortunately many of the young people that we do have in custody or who are in contact with youth services have very high levels of experience of family violence, with violence in general, with mental health issues and with drug and alcohol addictions at a surprisingly young age. Sometimes families need more support, which is why we need robust, well-run and well-funded protective and community services for children.

This bill delivers on this government’s long-term projects to build greater provision for protecting children and to provide community services for children and families. This includes delivering our Roadmap for Reform: Strong Families, Safe Children, a long-term project which will transform the system from a crisis response to an early intervention response—and a prevention response as well, because we know that preventing trauma before it occurs will be better for children in the long run.

A key reform in this bill is raising the age at which statutory intervention to protect a child can occur, from 17 to 18 years old, which means that 17-year-olds in need of protection can get protection. As the mother of a 17-year-old I can see how teenagers at this point in their lives can fall between the gaps. Currently many 17-year-olds do fall between the gaps in the services, and even if they flee violence at home, they are not eligible for child protection services in many cases and are considered too young for adult services. That is what we mean by ‘falling through the gaps’. Young people are at high risk of homelessness and contact with the justice system. I have got to say over many years of travelling between Melton and Sydenham when I used to go and visit my mum before she moved in with me, going up and down the backstreets of Melton late at night I would come across young people sleeping at bus stops, in the main around 16 and 17 years old. In the main, when I stopped to talk to them I would find that they were fleeing family violence at home and did not have support of services. That has since changed, with great facilities like the Hope Street facility that has since been built. All of these reforms will reduce the strain on the system and services and give better support to young people to get a better start in life.

This bill will progress Victoria’s landmark reform to support all care leavers up to the age of 21. This is, in the words of the CEO of Anglicare and the Home Stretch coalition, ‘the single most significant reform in child welfare in a generation’, and I agree with that quote. It is one of the proudest things that this government has done and will see major change as a result in the years to come.

This bill will expand the secretary’s responsibility to assist young people under the age of 21 who are transitioning from out-of-home care into adulthood, including those young people who have grown up in permanent care. This means that care leavers will also have the help they need to live happy and fulfilled lives as adults. This is a reform where Victoria leads the nation, building on Victoria’s Home Stretch program. The bill creates a legal obligation for the secretary to provide a transition-to-adulthood allowance for eligible care leavers. These increased supports for 17- to 21-year-olds and a restructured system will ensure children and their families are better protected from coming into contact with the criminal justice system.

Key aspects of the bill support self-determination for Aboriginal children in line with landmark partnerships—the Wungurilwil Gapgapduir: Aboriginal Children and Families Agreement. Victoria is working as part of Closing the Gap National Agreement targets to reduce the rate of over-representation of children in care by 45 per cent in 2031, and we have similar targets for Aboriginal children also in custody, driving down those numbers.

In order to achieve these key reforms, the bill includes legislating all five aspects underpinning the intent of the Aboriginal child placement principles, namely prevention, participation, partnership, placement and connection, and also legislating circumstances where the secretary can authorise an Aboriginal agency to undertake investigative protections and interventions for children. I want to thank the Victorian Aboriginal Child Care Agency and the Bendigo and District Aboriginal Cooperative for their amazing work in leading the implementation of these section 18 reforms. They are totally life-changing for so many families. You are leading the way in providing safety and wellbeing for children in the Aboriginal community, and I am confident that Victoria will continue to lead this reform, especially while we embark on national-leading work to further embed self-determination, creating treaties and establishing the Yoo-rrook Justice Commission.

While the opposition have failed to contribute on meaningful debates in this space for many years now, we are getting on with working to improve the services, which are so precious to Victorian families. This bill will build a better Victoria and a better Victoria for our children. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr HODGETT (Croydon) (12:30): It is a pleasure to rise to make a contribution on the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021. By way of background, modernising the legislative framework in child protection has been an ongoing process since the Liberal-Nationals were last in government. Many of the changes contained within this bill stem from the work that the coalition started, and a lot of that was outlined by the member for Lowan, who led the debate on this bill—yesterday, I think it commenced. Stakeholders have long been calling for significant legislative changes in Victoria to improve the transition for young people leaving out-of-home care, and new reporting shows that 54 per cent of young care leavers in Victoria experience homelessness within four years. I think the member for Ferntree Gully touched on that in his contribution there, so I will not add to that. But it is quite staggering that the new reporting shows that 54 per cent of young care leavers in Victoria experience homelessness within four years.

Consequently, the government recently launched the Home Stretch program to provide young people with support to transition into adulthood once leaving out-of-home care. The program applies to young people up to the age of 21 years and provides an accommodation allowance, casework, employment and other wellbeing supports. The bill seeks to give force to that program, which is strongly supported by the sector. Again, previous speakers I think on both sides of the house have talked about the merits of the Home Stretch program. I support that. It is a great program. I do not intend to add to that in my contribution here. I think there have been enough comments made in the debate about that Home Stretch program and all that it delivers. Suffice to say that the bill is seeking to give force to that program, noting that it is strongly supported by the sector.

In addition, over-representation of Aboriginal children in the child protection system has been a longstanding issue that continues to grow. One in 10 Indigenous Victorian children is in care—a higher proportion than in any other Australian jurisdiction, and that alone should be a concern to all members of this place. That is quite a frightening statistic there. As the previous speaker, the Minister for Crime Prevention, just mentioned, the government just recently entered into an Aboriginal children and families agreement—the Wungurilwil Gapgapduir—and part of this agreement entails facilitating autonomy and self-determination among Aboriginal groups. As part of this, the bill seeks to endow Aboriginal organisations with greater power to enable Aboriginal children to be reunited with their family. This is in keeping with longstanding calls from the coalition for greater power to be handed to community agencies at the expense of government.

Moving to the purpose of the bill, and this is quite a lengthy bill, there are a number of paragraphs there. I did want to put a number of them on record, because it is important that we understand the purpose in the context of this debate. The purpose of the bill rests upon three key pillars, which are to modernise the legislative framework by decreasing over-representation of Aboriginal children and young people in care, implementing the Home Stretch program and shifting in some small way from a crisis management response to one of early intervention. The amendments to the principal act include, and I will go through a number of them now:

(i) to incorporate further Aboriginal child placement principles into the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005; and

(ii) to extend the Secretary’s powers to provide advice and assistance if there is significant concern for the wellbeing of an unborn child; and

(iii) to make amendments relating to use of seclusion in secure welfare services; and

(iv) to make amendments relating to child care agreements; and

(v) to expand the information disclosure provisions in the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005; and

(vi) to create an offence for reprisal actions against persons who make good faith reports or referrals; and

(vii) to extend time for the hearing of an application for an interim accommodation order after a child is placed in emergency care; and

(viii) to remove bail justice powers in relation to child protection; and

(ix) to amend provisions requiring certain applications and notices to be served on a child aged of or above 12 years so that the application or notice must be instead served on a child aged of or above 10 years; and

(x) to clarify the paramount considerations in case management of child protection proceedings in the Family Division; and

(xi) to prevent personal cross-examination in child protection proceedings in the Family Division of a witness by an unrepresented party where there is family violence or alleged family violence between that party and the witness; and

(xii) to amend the provisions relating to the provision of medical treatment to children who are subject to the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005; and

(xiii) to provide for the Secretary to authorise a person in charge of a community care agency to act in relation to a child; and

(xiv) to limit the circumstances in which the Secretary may direct a parent to resume parental responsibility of a child under a family reunification order or a care by Secretary order; and

(xv) to change certain terminology used in the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005; and

(xvi) to make provision for support for young people making the transition to adulthood …

and—

(b) to consequentially amend the Victoria Police Act 2013 and other Acts.

So, as I said, the Children Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021 is quite an extensive bill. There are a number of purposes to the bill, and I did want to list those so they are on record in the context of this debate and why we are supporting this bill. The bill is therefore complex and technical, covering many different areas of the child and welfare systems. In terms of the areas that we looked at when scrutinising the bill, there are no major areas of concern. However, given the large suite of amendments that have been introduced, many of which are minor and technical in nature, important as they may be, we will monitor implementation of the amendments and policy developments surrounding them to ensure the bill actually delivers what it is intended to.

I know with the shadow minister there was quite some debate in the last sitting week in terms of the introduction of these bills and the time allowed to consult with stakeholders. We on this side certainly place a high emphasis on the importance of going out and consulting stakeholders. Much legislation is introduced to this house and people out in the community may or may not be aware of the bills coming in and what they are intended to do, so we like to consult widely to let people know what is happening in the Parliament in terms of legislation coming in, what the government is doing and what changes they are making and to seek opinion, comment, views, critique and scrutiny of those bills. Those of us in this place do not claim to have all the ideas, so it is important to do that consultation with key stakeholders to get their views on certain bills that are coming in here.

I know from the bill briefing with the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing, which occurred on 7 October, that consultation was carried out with those key stakeholders in the sector, even given the limited time, including detailed conversations with the chief executive officers of the Centre for Excellence in Child and Family Welfare, the Victorian Council of Social Service and Berry Street, who expressed their support for the bill. They are very important organisations, so their support for the bill gives us some confidence in what it is intended to do and the good outcomes that it should be able to deliver. But, as I did say, given the large suite of amendments that have been introduced, many of which are minor and technical in nature, we need to monitor the implementation of those amendments and the policy developments surrounding them, and that will be an ongoing task for us, in particular for the shadow minister in this case.

Those organisations expressed their support for the bill. The views of many other groups in the sector have been sought. Again, due to the tight time lines, they are still continuing to flow in. I think many or all of them are positive about the bill, but no doubt between houses—as we finish the debate in this house on the bill and it goes to the other place—any other consultation or views or support for the bill will be considered as the debate goes on in the Legislative Council.

In conclusion, we support the bill given that its core elements are to decrease the over-representation of Aboriginal children and young people in care, implement the Home Stretch program and seek to enable a shift from a crisis management approach to one of early intervention. All of these things we support, and they are strongly supported by the sector.

Mr McGUIRE (Broadmeadows) (12:40): The Victorian government is leading the biggest investment and reform agenda of the child protection system. The aim is to transform it from a crisis response model to one of earlier intervention and prevention. So this is the critical shift: to be addressing causes rather than symptoms and to make the intervention as soon as you possibly can in the right way for the people concerned. This is part of a coordinated strategy to focus on this key shift, and it is about diversion, early intervention and protection. The government is providing more support than ever before for at-risk children, their families and carers through a $1.2 billion boost for the children and family system in the Victorian budget for 2021–22, and I want to say that that is on top of the unprecedented $1 billion in last year’s budget. So there is the commitment, and we are seeing the vision and the plan being rolled out to address historical issues.

We have the ongoing attempts and consultation around treaties. We have the truth and justice insight into what our history really is, and we need to address that. You need to expose inequality before you can change it, and I think that that is really an important part of what has been going on in the whole strategy from the government. We have had the reforms to public drunkenness laws, which was another piece of legislation under the government; today we are looking at the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021 and what this means; and there is also a youth justice bill pending. I want to acknowledge all of the ministers who have been involved in doing this—and the Premier of course—and particularly the minister at the table, the Minister for Crime Prevention, who I work with as Parliamentary Secretary for Crime Prevention. There has been an enormous amount of work right across the cabinet and by people with goodwill and great intentions to try and walk through this historical minefield to try and actually get some justice.

As I said in my contribution when we were doing the bill on public drunkenness, there has been too much sorry business, too many preventable deaths and too many blighted lives—and that is the history. Now, what is done is done, but it is what we do next that counts. So that is really what the government is doing with this whole suite of policy changes and investments to give people better rights and greater opportunities, because the two are intertwined. I always argue that: equal rights and equal opportunities—so take care of people who just want a fair go, nothing more than that. And how do we do that? We have to look at it systemically all the way through what has happened over the histories since European settlement. So it is as simple and as complex as that, and I say that underscoring the complexity of how we give people a better chance in life. But it is a cause that you have to pursue, and you have to be relentless about it to try and make the change.

The bill addresses the Victorian government’s Roadmap for Reform: Strong Families, Safe Children, which establishes the blueprint for transforming the child and family system, and that is critical to, as I said, move from crisis response to earlier intervention and prevention. Critically the bill also recognises the government’s commitment to reducing the over-representation of Aboriginal children and young people in care, and you heard from the minister her understanding of firsthand lived experience, of seeing people at risk, going and personally talking to them, getting that firsthand invaluable insight from people. When you meet them in dark times in their lives sometimes it is the best truth telling you can get, because people just tell you dead straight what has happened and what needs to change. So I think that is a highly valuable insight and understanding.

It aims also to protect the rights of Aboriginal children to develop strong and positive cultural identity. We have seen that. That is important—to know who you are, know where you come from, know who is in your blood and why that matters. That is absolutely important and life defining. It also advances self-determination in the way that solutions are developed and delivered for and by Aboriginal Victorians. And many of us would say, ‘About time’. That is making important progress.

The bill reflects the Victorian government’s commitment to the protection of children and young people at risk and advancing the legislative solutions to equip our services, systems and workforces to keep children safe and strengthen families. While that sounds easy when it is written, the reality can be incredibly difficult. To try and get people to see the big picture, to come with you on this journey for reform—‘Here’s the vision, here’s the plan, here’s the strategy, here’s the collaboration’—all you have to do is change the silo mentality, turf wars, institutional ego, bureaucratic inertia and the political cycle—that is all, to make change. It is even more difficult in a time of pandemic when people are confronting the fog and the fatigue of the pandemic, so I want to acknowledge the hard work done by so many and particularly the Indigenous community—their leaders have been outstanding—to mount the case and design the process. It is being done with collaboration at heart but with Indigenous leadership.

Another important part of this bill is that it increases the age at which statutory intervention can occur to protect the child from under 17 years to under 18 years. As the minister pointed out, this is really important because currently provisions prevent new reports of abuse and neglect regarding 17-year-olds who are not a under a protection order from being received and investigated. Importantly this change closes a service gap for 17-year-olds in need of protection. That is what you want; you want needs-based policies. You want to be able to make sure that that is what is being addressed. These young people are at high risk of homelessness and therefore contact with the justice system, and it addresses a longstanding gap for 17-year-olds with a disability who require statutory intervention to enable significant decisions to be made.

So here is a strategy from the government from the biggest picture that you can take: the history of our continent. How do we address what has happened since European settlement and how do we come to a fair go? Fundamentally that is what we are trying to do, and it is a fair go for all. This whole series of different pieces of legislation to get it done, to address what needs to happen at all the different levels, is really significant. The minister did point out that a youth justice bill is pending, and in my contribution on public drunkenness I raised the issue about raising the age, because studies show that the younger a child is when they have their first contact with their criminal justice system, the higher the chance of future offending. So as the Parliamentary Secretary for Crime Prevention I am saying that this is a duty whose time has come. So let us see whether we can bring this together and help these vulnerable children to have equal rights and equal opportunities and a better chance in life in one of the great countries. So let us celebrate it. Let us celebrate history, culture and identity and build a better future together.

Mr TAK (Clarinda) (12:50): I am delighted to join these contributions on the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection Bill) 2021. This is another important bill, with its objectives to create a contemporary rights-based legislative framework that enhances support and collaborative multi-agency service responses to vulnerable children and families, advances self-determination for Aboriginal children and strengthens the system to protect children at risk. I commend the minister at the table and the parliamentary staff for their hard work—and the former Minister for Child Protection.

The bill will achieve these objectives by amending the provisions for protecting children and providing community services for children and families of the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005—namely, to modernise the legislative framework and enhance early intervention, prevention and diversion, which is very important; to elevate the rights of the child; to advance Aboriginal self-determination and self-management; to promote permanency for children by reducing adversarial court proceedings and delays; to strengthen the system that protects children; and, importantly, to make technical and clarifying amendments to enable the effective operation of the legislation. That is a comprehensive list of changes, changes that I am happy to support here today. I would just like to run through each of those changes and expand on some of those now, if I may.

In terms of modernising the legislative framework and enhancing early intervention, prevention and diversion, the hardworking member already alluded to a few changes. The first is in relation to working with families of unborn children. These changes have been made to keep unborn children at the centre of focus. With the consent of the mother, child protection or community-based child and family services are able to provide support to a person who will be a caregiver or other significant person. To support early intervention with families prior to the birth of a child and in recognition of different family types, the bill will clarify that, with the consent of the mother of the unborn child, anyone likely to assume the parental responsibility for the child once born and anyone else who will be significant to the child may be offered advice and services. Importantly, it retains the need to obtain the consent of the mother of the unborn child before advice and services can be provided to another person. This will allow the mother to be protected, should she be experiencing family violence.

This is a commonsense change and one that will significantly help to advance and enhance early intervention, prevention and diversion. The benefits of early intervention were quite clear in the Roadmap for Reform: Strong Families, Safe Children, which is our strategy to transform the child and family system and which focuses on early intervention and prevention to reduce vulnerability and equip children and young people to reach their full potential. Further, there are other changes—namely, the clarification and modernisation of voluntary childcare agreements. I also should note that, importantly, the additional reasons for when a childcare agreement can be entered into will not impact the approach to voluntary childcare agreements but instead will broaden the definition to better reflect the current practice. Also on this point, the bill provides additional reasons to ‘supporting the child and his or her parent and encouraging and assisting the child’s parent to resume the care of the child’ to also include: the parent requires overnight medical or similar treatment and no further supports are required for reunification; a third party such as child protection is delivering supports; and when ongoing short respite provided under an agreement is a core support to assist parents in maintaining ongoing care for the child.

Moving on to the changes to better protect victim-survivors of family violence from perpetrators, the bill expressly prohibits the cross-examining of witnesses by perpetrators of family violence in child protection proceedings in the family division of the Children’s Court, which I think is very important. I am very proud to be part of a government that is committed to ending the epidemic of family violence in Victoria. This change here is just one small example of that commitment, but one that will make a positive difference in the protection of victim-survivors of family violence.

The bill will prevent a party to a proceeding from personally cross-examining a witness in the proceeding if there is an allegation of family violence between the party and the witness and any of the following factors are present: (a) the party is listed as a respondent on an intervention order where the witness is an affected family member or an application for an intervention order has been made; (b) the party has been found guilty of or is charged with an offence that constitutes family violence; or (c) the court is satisfied that it would have a harmful impact on the witness for the witness to be cross-examined by the party.

The approach in the bill is modelled on the Family Law Act 1975, which was identified by stakeholders as the preferred model to give the widest possible protection to victim-survivors while enabling procedural fairness for both parties. To provide procedural fairness, a legally unrepresented party will be referred to Victoria Legal Aid to enable the cross-examination to be conducted by a legal practitioner acting on their behalf so that there are also no issues of procedural fairness. The prohibiting of cross-examination of a witness victim-survivor is also very important.

I just would like to conclude. In the time remaining I think it is important to touch on the consultation, which has been extensive. A total of 68 stakeholder groups, including government departments, community services and peak statutory and regulatory bodies participated in the consultations on the bill via a series of information sessions and tailored stakeholder consultation sessions. That is a significant number, which is positive. The consultation activities included six information sessions explaining the background and intent of the legislative reform and each of the amendments; tailored consultation sessions on the amendments requested by 57 stakeholder groups; and three co-design workshops with the Children’s Court and one co-design workshop with Victoria Legal Aid on timely decision-making for children subject to interim accommodation orders. So there has been a significant process, which I am happy to see. The bill has broad support across these stakeholders.

I am so happy to support this bill, an important bill that will better protect Victorian children, help to make the service system work better for children and families and achieve a better long-term social outcome. I will just conclude by reinforcing what many of the other honourable members have already made clear: every child has the right to reach their full potential, and the bill will mean more children are safe and more families are strong. With this, I commend the bill to the house.

Business interrupted under resolution of house of 7 October.

Members

Minister for Water

Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change

Minister for Agriculture

Absence

Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (13:01): I rise to inform the house that today I will answer questions for the portfolios of water, police; energy, environment and climate change, solar homes; and regional development and agriculture.

Questions without notice and ministers statements

COVID-19

Mr GUY (Bulleen—Leader of the Opposition) (13:01): My question is to the Minister for Health. Given that today Victoria has recorded five times the number of COVID cases as New South Wales at 2297, yet Victoria locked down far sooner than New South Wales—and we are still in lockdown—why has the government’s COVID response yet again failed to keep Victorians safe?

Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (13:02): Can I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. I think the basis of the honourable Leader of the Opposition’s question is somewhat flawed in terms of the facts of the matter as to the timing of the arrangements in the two states, noting of course that the particular arrangements in New South Wales did give cause to effect the spread of this particular transmission event in the ACT, Victoria and New Zealand.

In regard to the undeniable fact that today Victoria has had a significant increase in daily case numbers, it does come as a disappointment to all Victorians, I am sure. But whilst it is a record daily high, it is accompanied by a number of other records; for instance, a record series of tests not just yesterday but over the course of the past week. It has also been accompanied by a record series of vaccinations over the course of the past week, which has seen Victoria sit, as of yesterday—I suspect it is higher now given that it is after midday today—at 87.6 per cent of first dose vaccinations for those Victorians aged 16 years and over and 62 per cent of double dose vaccinations for Victorians aged 16 years and over.

In regard to the honourable member’s assertion that the Victorian strategy is doing anything other than delivering on the national plan to reopen and doing so in a way that seeks to pass us through those 70 and 80 per cent double dose windows, in the Victorian government’s view the evidence that is before us clearly says that we are delivering through the road map on that national plan. Essentially what we are seeing is what all states and jurisdictions are confronting at different points of this delivery of the national plan, and that is the decoupling of daily cases from the process of hospitalisation and other arrangements that are designed to essentially normalise, as difficult as it will be, the operation of our reopened economy, our reopened society and the protection of our public health system in the course of that. In regard to the honourable member’s assertion, he is by extension essentially saying that the national plan should not be delivered. He is essentially arguing that the national plan is not valid— (Time expired)

Mr GUY (Bulleen—Leader of the Opposition) (13:05): When it comes to managing COVID is the state government, as the minister is asserting, simply unlucky, or are today’s figures evidence of a systemic failure in public administration?

Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (13:05): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his supplementary question. There have been other commentators who have referred to ‘the single greatest failure in public administration during the course of this pandemic’, and I refer to former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who referred to the fact that the catastrophe of the national vaccine rollout is the single greatest failure of public policy in this country’s history. I think if we are comparing apples with apples and oranges with oranges, the honourable member’s comparison does not hold. What we do know is that this particularly high number of infection cases reported today has come as a disappointment to many, and none more than those people involved, and we wish them a speedy recovery on their current journey.

Ministers statements: Schools Mental Health Fund

Mr MERLINO (Monbulk—Minister for Education, Minister for Mental Health, Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers) (13:06): Today I rise to update the house about how the Andrews government will provide students with further tailored support for their mental health. The Andrews government’s $200 million Schools Mental Health Fund acquits a key recommendation of the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System, which called for a fund to support schools with evidence-informed initiatives for students’ mental health and wellbeing. Today we launched that menu for schools to choose from. The commission also recommended that rural and regional schools be a priority, and that is exactly what we are doing—in the first year for every government school in rural and regional Victoria and then for metro schools beyond that.

With schools having already received their indicative budgets for next year, this announcement means they can make decisions immediately and be fully informed. Schools will be able to select from evidence-based programs and initiatives that best match the needs of their students across three tiers of intervention: tier 1, positive mental health promotion, includes things like mental health first-aid training, positive education and therapy dogs; tier 2, early intervention and cohort-specific initiatives like cross-cultural responsiveness training, art therapy and trauma-informed care; or tier 3, direct additional mental health practitioners in our schools. We heard this morning from Chelsie Spence and her adorable therapy dog Joosh about how Joosh helps students at school with their mental health and their engagement. It is just one example of how this fund will make a difference at government schools right across Victoria.

On this side of the house we accepted every single one of the recommendations of the royal commission because we know it is important not just to talk about how we support mental health but to actually fund it and to actually deliver initiatives, critical ones like the one I have just announced today. Now more than ever our kids need support both at home and at school to make sure that their wellbeing is on track, and the Andrews government is doing exactly that.

COVID-19

Mr GUY (Bulleen—Leader of the Opposition) (13:08): My question is to the Minister for Health. Leading vascular surgeon Dr Sue Morris has today said:

… some person in the Andrews government has thought it was a great idea to try and offload the public patients into the private system, and that is now at the expense of the privately insured patients.

How are those private patients, in pain and severely debilitated, any less deserving of immediate care than any other patient?

Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (13:09): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. I have not seen the particular comments that he has attributed to that particular surgeon, but I assume from the context of the question that it is in regard to the public health orders that are coming into place as to how we manage our way through the increased number of infections in our community and the corresponding increase in cases of COVID-19 in our public hospital system, and the impact that that in turn has had on the operation of that system and, as per the national partnership agreement that we have with the commonwealth and the private sector health providers, the arrangements that we now have in place to gradually shift some level of clinical delivery of services from the public to the private sector whilst at the same time rescheduling some non-urgent—other than category 1 and category 2A—surgeries and additions into other settings.

It was not clear to me from the honourable member’s question that that is what his reference was, but we have addressed that issue on quite a number of occasions in question time. The principle is always the same: these decisions are made on the basis of clinical advice as to the most pressing and urgent cases that require support get the support first. In the context of COVID-19, that means an increasing number of COVID-19 cases, with all the requirements around the extra PPE, the extra infection prevention and control measures, and the extra cautions that need to be taken that play through both the public and the private systems.

I want to thank the private operators for the support that they have brought to this arrangement. I want to thank particularly our frontline public healthcare services for the way in which they have gone about this. We cannot rule out, as per the national plan, as we continue to reopen, and as our friends in New South Wales have also delivered, the forecast that as we continue down this path, in accordance with the Burnet modelling and the Doherty modelling for the national plan, we will continue to see increased numbers of cases—fortunately at nowhere near the level of death that we saw as a proportion in 2020, but any death is one too many. We will see this set of arrangements play out for some time yet over the course of 2021. That is why the partnership between our public health sector and the private health system is so important—as it was in 2020—to get us through this, and as it is in New South Wales and as it is in Victoria.

Mr GUY (Bulleen—Leader of the Opposition) (13:12): Noting the record number of Victorians now waiting for elective surgery and the private system assisting, as the minister says, in clearing it, when will the government resume elective surgery in public hospitals back to 100 per cent?

Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (13:12): When the clinical advice says it is safe to do so and when we have got around again to investing record amounts, as we have in the most recent budgets from both 2020 and 2021, to address that very need. But it needs to be done in a clinically safe way and with infection prevention and control measures that keep those patients safe, that keep our healthcare workers safe and that keep the wider Victorian community as safe as we possibly can. In all those regards the partnership between the private sector and the state sector is so important. It should not be taken—as I think it could have been perhaps incorrectly inferred by anyone listening out there—that elective surgery has been turned off. It has not been. It continues to be delivered, particularly in our regions and particularly in a number of our non-streamed hospitals at the moment.

Ministers statements: gender equality

Ms WILLIAMS (Dandenong—Minister for Prevention of Family Violence, Minister for Women, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs) (13:13): I rise today to update the house on the Andrews government’s commitment to improving outcomes for Victorian women in the workplace and in every place. The pandemic has been a challenging year, or 18 months or so, for all Victorians, but without doubt it has had a significant and disproportionate impact on women. Despite recent progress, decades of disadvantage and discrimination mean this pandemic was never going to be felt equally—for starters, a pay gap that says women work 61 days for free each year, inequalities that see women overrepresented in low-paid and insecure work, more likely to be unemployed and twice as likely to be underemployed. We do twice the unpaid care but retire with half the superannuation, and the risk of gendered violence remains pervasive. Women experience disadvantage in almost every aspect of our lives, and it all comes back to one thing—gender inequality.

But this government is committed to change. We are implementing Australia’s first gender equality act, with clear actions to address the gender pay gap and reduce workplace sexual harassment, among many other things, in more than 300 public sector organisations. We have established a gender-responsive budgeting unit to ensure outcomes for women are measured and embedded as a part of the entire state budget process. We have established the inquiry into economic equity for Victorian women to find solutions to entrenched barriers to women’s workforce participation and security. From three-year-old kinder to free TAFE, we are making it easier for women to get back into work, and we have achieved gender parity on paid government boards as well.

We will rebuild a fairer, more equal economy that does not just affect women but includes us—as educators, social workers, innovators, carers, tradies, creatives and leaders in all fields in our community. We are removing barriers, getting women into work and supporting the economic security we not only need but deserve. It is smart, it is fair and it is right, because this government understands that with women at every table in every room we see better outcomes for everyone.

VCE exams

Mr HODGETT (Croydon) (13:15): My question is to the Minister for Education. Having had months to plan and prepare, what measures has the government put in place to ensure that COVID-positive students are able to sit their VCE exams?

Mr MERLINO (Monbulk—Minister for Education, Minister for Mental Health, Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers) (13:16): I thank the honourable member for his question, an important question and one that relates to students. One wonders why his leader dudded him and gave him no responsibility for students. The problem for the honourable member is he obviously ignored a significant announcement that I made just this morning in regard to VCE students and providing them comfort and certainty that they will be able to sit their exams. Today I announced that following significant work and engagement with the public health team and my department, if you are a VCE student other than if you are a confirmed positive COVID case—

A member: That was the question.

Mr MERLINO: I am sorry?

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Kew!

Mr MERLINO: Just hang on a second. For every single VCE student other than a confirmed case, you will be able to sit every single one of your exams—every single one. That includes if you are a primary close contact. If you are a primary close contact, you will get an exemption from isolation to go and sit your exam. So if you are VCE student that has been double vaxxed, if you are fully vaccinated, you will be in isolation for seven days but will be able to leave isolation and go and sit your exam in a COVID-safe way—separate entrance, separate room and VCE exam supervisors in healthcare worker PPE. You will be able to sit every single exam.

If you are a confirmed positive COVID case, then you are in isolation as per anyone else in our community—and there are longstanding provisions, well known by parents, by students and by school communities. This year, last year—any year—if you are ill, if you are sick, if you are injured, there is a derived examination score for any exam that you miss.

Mr Andrews: That is what the GAT is for, isn’t it?

Mr MERLINO: Exactly. The Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and the school community look at school-based assessments and look at the general achievement test (GAT) that 85 000 students participated in, and a fair derived exam score is provided for those students. So whether you are a positive case or whether you are a primary close contact, every single student will get a score that fairly reflects their year this year.

Mr HODGETT (Croydon) (13:19): Given a derived score disadvantages many students as well as many students do not want a derived score, will the government urgently introduce online exam options to ensure students who are COVID positive or have to isolate can sit their VCE exams?

Mr Andrews: Was the announcement televised today?

Mr MERLINO (Monbulk—Minister for Education, Minister for Mental Health, Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers) (13:19): It was televised—it was absolutely televised. The honourable member is completely and utterly incorrect. The derived examination score is well known and well understood and is absolutely fair. But to make sure it is even fairer, not only is there the derived examination score, which looks at school-based assessments and the GAT, there is also the consideration of educational disadvantage process. That worked last year, and we have got it in place for every single final-year student, whether they are VCE or VCAL. Any impact of COVID—whether it is as a result of being ill and in hospital or the long period of lockdown has had an impact on their mental health—is taken into consideration and will be reflected in their final-year score. On this side of the house we are doing the safe thing for all our students and ensuring every single VCE student is supported this year.

Ministers statements: COVID-19

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) (13:20): I rise to provide an update on the vaccinated economy trial. Moving to a vaccinated economy means more people will be able to safely attend businesses, venues and events. That will benefit not just those businesses but their workers and the community more generally, but it will require a change in the way businesses and organisations operate. We have to make sure that the processes and the training and the technology are in place to make that happen.

That is why this week we commenced those vaccinated economy trials in regional Victoria so that we can test those settings that will be in place in phase B of the road map. They are about helping us understand and refine the operational settings that will be required to safely open up the economy to the fully vaccinated. Through those trials we will be in a position to confirm the best processes for establishing vaccination status, helping businesses to stay safe and to stay open. There are 14 trial sites across six local government areas: Bass Coast, Greater Bendigo, Pyrenees, Warrnambool, Buloke and East Gippsland. We have got amongst the participating businesses a cinema, galleries, hotels, a cafe, a gym, a church, a beauty clinic, a real estate agency and indeed a race meeting at the ’Bool today.

A dozen of those trials have commenced. The response from business has been really positive, as has the response from their patrons. We will be rolling out the last couple of sites over the next couple of days. We want to maximise those trading opportunities for businesses once we are open, because that will expedite economic recovery. It means jobs for Victorians, whether it is in hospitality, real estate, hair and beauty or indeed in racing, but we have to do that as safely as we can by ensuring that the patrons in those establishments and in those settings are vaccinated. That is what gives those businesses the best chance not just to open but to stay open, and that is why those trials are so very important.

COVID-19 vaccinations

Mr NORTHE (Morwell) (13:22): My question is to the Minister for Health. Minister, many workers are currently resigning or being stood down in a number of sectors and industries due to COVID-19 vaccination now being mandatory for authorised workers and employees in the areas of education, health care and construction. Minister, has the government received any modelling or advice as to whether the vaccine mandate will lead to critical skill shortages and the compromising of services to Victorian citizens?

Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (13:23): Can I thank the member for Morwell for his question. I have not received specific modelling as the honourable member outlines, but what I have seen today are the unemployment figures nationally—not really my portfolio, but if I can freelance a little bit. The federal minister has put out a statement talking about the fact that lockdowns in Victoria, the ACT and New South Wales have contributed to the very things that the honourable member refers to: losses of jobs, losses of skills and big impacts on communities. But those lockdowns in those three jurisdictions have been there for a very good reason, and part of the reason is to make sure that when we can safely and sustainably reopen, those very issues that the honourable member refers to can be addressed. I am sure all jurisdictions that are undergoing this lockdown at the moment as we seek to deliver the national plan will address those matters.

The honourable member’s, I think, misalignment and what underpins his question goes to the reason behind the engagement strategies around vaccine strategies. The vaccine strategy has at least three pillars. Firstly, there is the education component to it that both state and national jurisdictions are pursuing. That has been overwhelmingly successful with the vast majority of Victorians, as we have seen very high numbers of people come forward to get that support. Then there are the engagement strategies, which the honourable member will know from his own community recently, which had to go through a seven-day lockdown as a result of particularly at-risk communities being somewhat disengaged from the vaccine program. That important arrangement is also critical.

The third part of the strategy goes to the requirement or the mandating aspect of the vaccine strategy. That is there for a variety of reasons across some of the settings that the honourable member referred to, and indeed now others as a result of orders coming into effect for the approved worker and approved worksite arrangements, which will see that set of orders cover many, many thousands of workers. The honourable member asserts that this has led to many resignations. I am not aware of those, but I am aware of the broad support from the employers. For instance, I participated in a Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Zoom some weeks ago where this very measure was called upon. It was asked of me and the chief health officer by VCCI. We have seen company after company bring this forward, and it is a measure that we do not resile from.

Mr NORTHE (Morwell) (13:26): Minister, with respect to the vaccine mandate, has the government received any modelling or advice as to when the mandate will be lifted for authorised workers, and if so, when is this likely to be?

Mr FOLEY (Albert Park—Minister for Health, Minister for Ambulance Services, Minister for Equality) (13:26): It will be there as long as the public health advice says it needs to be there. The honourable member and all honourable members and the Victorian community know that these arrangements are there so as to ensure that the safety and the wellbeing of Victorians is underpinning the delivery of the national plan to reopen and Victoria’s road map to do the same. If, again, the honourable member’s question is there to send a message that perhaps people want to wait out this arrangement, let me take this opportunity to be very clear: it will be a very long wait. It will be there for as long as it is proportionate and needed to be put in place to keep Victorians safe and to underpin our safe reopening. I have seen public commentary that talks about this measure being needed until as long as April 2022.

Ministers statements: level crossing removals

Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop) (13:27): I am very pleased to update the house on the Andrews Labor government’s removal of 85 of Victoria’s most dangerous and congested level crossings, and I am very pleased to advise that 47 are gone. We are on track to remove number 50 later this year, a full year ahead of schedule. Eighty-five of these dangerous and deadly deathtraps will be gone by 2025. Those with good memories know that that figure was actually originally 75 by 2025, but we are so far ahead of schedule that we have been able to add a further 10 level crossings to the program. Works are underway at sites across Melbourne, including at Williamstown, Hoppers Crossing, Sunbury, Glenroy, Preston, Surrey Hills, Lilydale, Mooroolbark, Cranbourne and at several sites along the Frankston line, including Chelsea, Edithvale and Bonbeach, and there are level crossings going at South Barwon as well.

Around 6000 Victorians are currently working on these sites right now, all of them meeting the mandatory vaccination requirements for authorised workers. I want to thank these men and women for going out and getting vaccinated to help us get Victorians back to work. Since March 2015 around 60 million hours have been worked on level crossing removals. So not only are we removing dangerous deathtraps, reducing congestion in local communities, we have made a massive contribution to Victoria’s economy as well.

On the weekend we released those new designs for the stations at Pakenham as part of a project to remove three level crossings and go further—extend the rail line into this area. There are level crossing works at Surrey Hills, Mont Albert, Preston, Lilydale, Williamstown, Hoppers Crossing and Cranbourne. They all have one thing in common. That one thing in common is that at the last election the Leader of the Opposition committed to withdraw these sites as a cost-cutting measure for their budget. We are getting on and getting rid of these level crossings.

Local government taxes

Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (13:30): My question is to the Treasurer. Will the government legislate to stop rogue local councils such as the City of Yarra imposing new taxes on hardworking small business owners, who have already had it so tough and have had no other option than to set up on the street to comply with the government’s road map?

Mr PALLAS (Werribee—Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Industrial Relations) (13:30): Well, I have got to say, I have waited 142 days for a question, and today is the day—and frankly I am underwhelmed. I would have expected better. Can I thank the member for his question, such as it is, and can I also make the point that this government has stood with business and the community, making over $13 billion worth of support payments to them to ensure that business and the community are assisted through this pandemic. With regard to the matter specifically put around the autonomy of local government and whether or not local government should be putting in place charges of this nature, let me be clear: I do not particularly like these charges. I do not think they are a good thing. Certainly they are not a good look in the current environment, when businesses are going through a process—

Mr Southwick: On a point of order, Speaker, I would ask you to bring the Treasurer back to answering the question. It was not whether they were a good look but whether the government would actually legislate to stop these charges being imposed on small businesses that are have already done it so tough and are on their knees.

The SPEAKER: Order! I heard the point of order. The Treasurer is being relevant to the question that was put to him.

Mr PALLAS: Well, once again, we continue to work constructively with local government rather than going around telling local government what they should do. As the Premier quite rightly says, local government have their own constituencies. They are elected by their constituencies, and they are ultimately accountable to those constituencies. From this government’s point of view the desire to impose taxes of this nature upon business is inappropriate, but it is also inappropriate for government to simply jump in over the top of local government. We will continue to urge those local governments, as the minister has—she has written to them; she has made it clear, the minister for jobs and small business—that in her view these matters and this course of action are inappropriate. We maintain that view, and we will continue to express it. But we will do it through appropriate procedures, and that means respecting the autonomy of local government and also insisting upon local government being accountable to their constituencies for the choices they make. In our view these choices and these impositions on business at this time are wrong.

Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (13:33): Three of the governments have confirmed today that they refuse to legislate. Will the government cover the costs that these businesses are incurring from rogue local councillors to ensure they are not out of pocket when all they are trying to do is adhere to the government’s road map?

Mr PALLAS (Werribee—Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Industrial Relations) (13:33): I thank the member for his question—

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Kew!

Mr PALLAS: I would just make the point we had a regional member for Western Victoria suggesting we should have our GST taken off us if we do not behave the right way. So now we see how the conservatives would operate in government—basically find some way to inflict pain upon tiers of government that do not behave the way they want.

Mr Southwick: On a point of order, Speaker, I would ask you to bring the Treasurer back to answering the question. This was not about what the opposition would do. It is about what the government would do in terms of meeting these costs—

A member interjected.

The SPEAKER: Order! The Deputy Premier is warned!

Mr Southwick: of small businesses that are already out of pocket and on their knees.

Mr Pakula: On the point of order, Speaker, the member for Caulfield is effectively proposing that when a council imposes an unjust charge, the Victorian government should hand over money to businesses so that charge can be paid—in other words, a transfer from the taxpayers of Victoria to the City of Yarra—and I think the Treasurer is well within his rights to point—

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! I uphold the point of order. The Treasurer should come back to answering the question.

Mr PALLAS: In answer to the question: no. The City of Yarra will be held accountable for the choices they make by their constituents. More importantly, if the member for Caulfield aspires to be a local councillor—that is, if he gets too full of himself and he thinks he might rise to even dizzier heights than he currently occupies—can I suggest to him he occupy his time and effort on the business of the government of the state of Victoria rather than simply trying to impose upon the people of Victoria further cost burdens.

Ministers statements: COVID-19 vaccinations

Mr ANDREWS (Mulgrave—Premier) (13:35): I am delighted to be able to update the house that some 37 611 vaccines were administered in state hubs yesterday, another very strong performance but one part, a very important part, of our vaccination program. We have seen some 4 million doses through our state-run hubs in total, 8.3 million doses across the state, including primary care and our state hubs. That means we have got to a position where 87.6 per cent of the population 16 and over are single-dose vaccinated and 62 per cent of the community 16 and over are fully vaccinated. So we are closing in rapidly on the 70 per cent double dose and 90 per cent single dose, and that is an absolute credit to every Victorian who has gone forward and got vaccinated, playing their part to not only get us open, to not only make us free, but to allow us as a state, as a community and as an economy to prosper. That is exactly what vaccination is. It is also about keeping people safe and keeping people out of hospital.

We have had some 35 000 positive cases since the middle of July this year, and only 7 per cent of those cases were fully vaccinated. There are similar numbers when it comes to hospital admissions. There are a very small number—but some—of patients in hospital, and we wish them well of course, but the percentage of people who are in hospital who are fully vaccinated is but a fraction—hardly any is the key point. It is not absolute, but you dramatically reduce your risk of finishing up in hospital and gravely ill if you are double-dose vaccinated That is why it is so impressive that in record numbers and in record time Victorians have come forward to be vaccinated. Now, we still have a job to do. We still have to get to that 70 per cent and indeed 80 per cent and go beyond that if we can, because every single dose is one less person in all likelihood that will finish up in hospital, less pressure on our nurses and more freedom and back to normality. That is what we are all chasing.

Bills

Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021

Second reading

Debate resumed.

Following speeches incorporated in accordance with resolution of house of 7 October:

Ms EDWARDS (Bendigo West)

I’m really pleased to see this amendment before the house today. This is an important reform for all children and young people who find themselves in difficult family circumstances and where child protection is involved.

Can I start my contribution by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land we are on today and pay my respects to their elders past, present and emerging.

I do this today as this amendment is very focused on Aboriginal children and families.

The amendment elevates the rights of the child in the legislative framework, the participation of children in decision-making about their futures and the responsibility to support young people to reach their full potential as they transition to adulthood. It also continues the important work that we are leading in Victoria to recognise the importance of self-determination and self-management to keep Aboriginal children safe and to enable them to grow strong in their culture.

This government continues to lead Australia in making legislative, policy and systems changes to reduce the over-representation of Aboriginal children in care by prioritising self-determination and facilitating Aboriginal models of care delivered by Aboriginal community controlled organisations.

I want to acknowledge and give a big shout-out to the Dja Dja Wurrung Bendigo and District Aboriginal Co-operative (BDAC) for the incredible work they are doing in supporting children, families and community across their country.

In 2017 the Dja Dja Wurrung BDAC was chosen to pilot a new program and take the next vital step in Aboriginal self-determination through the Aboriginal Children in Aboriginal Care program.

The program was to realise the implementation of section 18 of the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005, giving greater responsibility for the safety and protection of vulnerable children subject to Children’s Court protection orders to approved Aboriginal organisations.

This new approach to child protection was to recognise that the needs of Aboriginal children and young people are best met by Aboriginal community services, allowing them to provide support to their children and their families in a manner that best meets their cultural and community needs.

This was an Australian first and was about closing the gap by empowering Aboriginal communities to help their children receive the care they need, address the unacceptable over-representation of Aboriginal children in out-of-home care and improve outcomes for Aboriginal children with child protection.

In 2019 the Andrews Labor government partnered with BDAC to continue building strong futures for Aboriginal children in care.

BDAC became only the second organisation of its kind authorised in Victoria to operate on a permanent basis the Aboriginal Children in Aboriginal Care program. Since then BDAC has supported many Aboriginal children who have been placed in Aboriginal-run care and connected them with their community and their culture.

This amendment before us today builds on this reform and, critically, recognises this government’s commitment to:

* reducing the over-representation of Aboriginal children and young people in care;

* protecting the rights of Aboriginal children to develop strong and positive cultural identity; and

* advancing self-determination in a way that solutions are developed and delivered for and by Aboriginal Victorians.

Evidence indicates that Aboriginal agencies are more effective in engaging with Aboriginal families, in assisting Aboriginal parents to acknowledge the need for change to provide safety and wellbeing for their children and in developing effective helping relationships.

I am proud that I have two daughters who both worked in child protection and care.

One was a residential care worker for many years and the other a child protection practitioner.

They were, like many who work in the industry, delighted to know that this government is enshrining in law a landmark reform to support all care leavers up to the age of 21.

Too often they saw young people leaving out-of-home care or foster care at 18 and not knowing where they would go, where they would find support and who to go to for help.

This government’s Home Stretch program was a landmark reform and another Australian first. It was rolled out to all care leavers in January of this year and was extended to include young people on permanent care orders from July this year.

This bill creates a legal obligation for the secretary of the department to provide a transition to adulthood allowance for all eligible care leavers.

The importance of this cannot be overstated.

Ensuring financial support for these young people assists them with the cost of accommodation and other living expenses to ensure their transition out of care is not riddled with challenges and stress.

For many young people this transition is difficult enough—leaving a secure environment, finding themselves out on their own. Research shows that a young person experiencing a difficult transition out of care will have poorer life outcomes.

It is incumbent on us not just as legislators but as a society to take action that will address the disparities in life outcomes for young people whom the state has had parental responsibility for.

Importantly these young people will not be left to fend for themselves. A key worker from Better Futures will support them across a range of life areas, including housing, education and training, employment, legal advice, access to health and community services, and counselling and support.

Supporting these care leavers is not only the morally right thing to do but it also makes good economic sense, with savings downstream across other areas of support, including homelessness, mental health and the criminal justice system.

Recognising the importance of supporting care leavers during the COVID-19 pandemic, this government announced in 2020 a further $4.3 million to expand the Home Stretch program to support young people in care turning 18 on or before 31 December 2020.

In addition, in the 2020–21 budget this government provided an additional $75 million over four years, including $46 million ongoing, to provide all Victorian care leavers with support. This investment is now providing universal Home Stretch support to all eligible care leavers from 16 years of age.

This bill also strengthens the requirements for all children involved with child protection to be supported to participate in decision-making about their future by introducing a new principle regarding child participation.

Putting the voices of children front and centre, the secretary or a community service must encourage and give adequate opportunity for the child to participate fully in the decision-making process.

It also requires that the child be given (in a way the child will understand) information about the nature of the proposed decision or action, the reasons the decision or action is proposed to be taken and how the child may participate in the decision-making process, including by making a submission or complaint in relation to the decision or action.

The voice of the child and listening to children is critical to empowering them and keeping them safe.

There are many changes within this amendment that are crucial to supporting children and youth and that strengthen child safety, improve Aboriginal cultural safety and empower children and young people.

These include modernising the legislative framework and enhancing early intervention, prevention and diversion, elevating the rights of the child, advancing Aboriginal self-determination and self-management, achieving permanency for children by reducing adversarial proceedings and delays, strengthening the child protection system and changing language to make it less confrontational.

It is a bill that I’m proud to speak on because the reforms within this legislation are about putting children and young people—no matter their background—front and centre.

I commend the bill to the house.

Ms SHEED (Shepparton)

I rise to make a contribution to the Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021.

The bill seeks to: incorporate further Aboriginal child placement principles, extend the secretary’s powers to provide advice and assistance if there is significant concern for the wellbeing of an unborn child, extend time for the hearing of an application for an interim accommodation order after a child is placed in emergency care and remove bail justice powers in relation to child protection, prevent personal cross-examination in child protection proceedings in the family division of a witness by an unrepresented party where there is family violence or alleged family violence between that party and the witness, make provision to support young people making the transition to adulthood, and make other important changes.

In the State of Greater Shepparton’s Children Report of 2019, compiled by Greater Shepparton council, we see that Shepparton’s rate of children in out-of-home care sat at 7.7 per cent out of 1000 children, compared to a state average of 4.6 per cent, in 2016. While this has fallen from 8.4 in 2014, we still have a long way to go.

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare reported that one in 18 Aboriginal children was in out-of-home care from 30 June 2020—that’s 11 times the rate for non-Indigenous children. Shepparton has the second-highest First Nations population outside of metropolitan Melbourne, and it is a great concern to my community to see an over-representation of Aboriginal children in out-of-home care. This bill seeks to help close this gap of over-representation of Aboriginal children in care by 45 per cent by 2031.

Across Victoria we have seen a steady increase in children in out-of-home care from 2017 to 2020 from an average of 5.4 in every 1000 children to 6.3 in every 1000. These are concerning statistics and we need to ensure these children receive the best possible care outside of their own homes. But of course we know that this is not always the case. As the former commissioner for children and young people Bernie Geary pointed out in his 2015 report entitled ‘… as a good parent would …’, there are many instances of failure to provide the level of care within the state system that children need and deserve. The neglect and abuse of children in state care, especially in residential services, was highlighted in that report.

Foster parents are extremely hard to find, and there is no doubt that many of them provide a caring and nurturing environment for the children that they often bring into their own families. In First Nations families we often see grandmothers providing long-term care for their grandchildren, and this form of kinship care is seen as culturally important as well as maintaining the familial links.

During my many years of practice as a family lawyer and as an independent children’s lawyer, I saw many tragic instances of family breakdown and child displacement. This is a cause of long-term trauma for children, which often reflects in their mental health as adults. It is being said by the experts that for a child to have even one meaningful adult in their life will improve the child’s outcomes and resilience.

This bill allows the Home Stretch program to continue. It was in January this year that Victoria became the first jurisdiction to extend Home Stretch to all young people leaving foster, kinship and residential care up to the age of 21, rather than leaving them to have to find their own way in life when they reach the age of 18 years. This program offers financial support for young people who choose to remain with their carer or move to independent accommodation until they reach 21 years of age. Some carers can afford to continue to support their foster children once they become adults, but many rely on the payments by the state. This program gives teenagers in this setting, and their carers, options on their next step to give these young adults a better start in adulthood.

The bill ensures that those who do leave their care situation will be given practical help to find and set up a home as well as the financial assistance they need to take that first step to living as an independent adult. On top of this, they will be supported with assistance to get into education, training or the workplace as well as the relevant health and community services they require at this crucial period of their lives.

These provisions will help steer our young people on a positive path of securing a safe place to live, gaining an education or trade and continuing to feel a part of the community. Without such support, we are throwing some of our most vulnerable community members to the outside world without a safety raft.

Research by the Victorian Department of Human Services in 2011 found that 9 per cent of a sample of 151 care leavers in Victoria had spent time in custody since leaving care. Of those who had been incarcerated since leaving care, 69 per cent had been incarcerated once, 8 per cent had been incarcerated twice, 8 per cent were incarcerated three times and 15 per cent were incarcerated four times.

With the implementation of this bill, these young people have a clear and positive way forward to a rewarding future rather than the potential of becoming homeless and entering a life of crime due to a lack of meaningful options.

I read in the Sydney Morning Herald on Sunday that more than 300 teenagers in state-funded care were forced to leave home during the lockdown in New South Wales. In the article, one woman who was forced into homelessness as a teenager spoke about how forcing children in out-of-home care to be independent at 18 led to intergenerational welfare dependency and drug use. These claims are backed up by a 2016 report from Deloitte research called Raising Our Children:Guiding Young Victorians in Care into Adulthood, which found that extending state care from 18 to 21 would halve the homelessness rate of care leavers, multiply their higher education participation by 2.5 times and reduce their alcohol and drug dependence from 15.8 per cent to 2.5 per cent.

This bill aims to offer a safety net to these vulnerable members of our community to offer them choices once they reach adulthood so they have opportunities to succeed in whatever path they take.

My main concern for these children is the lack of commitment to the provision of mental health services to repair the neurological damage that has occurred as a result of their adverse early childhood experiences. This must be addressed. We now know that 80 per cent of adult mental health can be attributed to adverse early childhood experiences. There is also emerging evidence of an association between adult physical health and adverse early childhood events.

The Shepparton neighbourhood schools program, which is run in five of our disadvantaged local primary schools, takes a multidisciplinary approach to identifying those children who are struggling in the education system, and a number of these are children in state care. They are children who have generally suffered from early childhood environmental trauma, and a number of them are given access to a therapeutic play specialist to work with them on an individual basis. The results are speaking for themselves as children gradually learn to regulate their feelings and develop more resilience, and they are then able to effectively interact in the classroom.

Our child protection system puts safety as its first tenet, and that is appropriate. However, a therapeutic approach must be taken to these children and they should be given access to the forms of therapy most appropriate for them or they will inevitably pass through the child protection system with poor outcomes, and in many cases move to the criminal justice system.

There are many other important amendments within this bill, which all seek to improve aspects of our child protection and institutional care arrangements.

I commend this bill to the house.

Mr FREGON (Mount Waverley) (13:38): I move:

That debate be now adjourned.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.

Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day.

Education and Training Reform Amendment (Senior Secondary Pathways Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2021

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Mr MERLINO:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Mr KENNEDY (Hawthorn) (13:39): During 2019—near the end of 2019—the Minister for Education invited me to a busman’s holiday, and basically the busman’s holiday was to chair the reference group in respect of the review into vocational and applied learning pathways in senior secondary schooling. I must say I am delighted then to be standing here now speaking in support of the Education and Training Reform Amendment (Senior Secondary Pathways Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2021, which has come directly from that review. I was delighted to have the opportunity, in a sense with a busman’s holiday, of going back to the things that I had been doing for 30 years or so, and during that time, near the end of that, we saw the introduction at Loyola College, where I was principal, of VCAL subjects and the advantages that came from those subjects being offered. I became fond of saying, ‘A good VCAL is better than a mediocre VCE’. Why I say that is that previous to VCAL being established and being taken on there would be plenty of students who would struggle through the VCE. They would perhaps get a minimum result, they did not enjoy the experience and it might have even been humiliating to feel, ‘Well, I’m not up to this’, ‘I can’t do this’, and so on.

So the arrival of VCAL was a fantastic development because you could get a good VCAL as opposed to a mediocre VCE. What did it entail? First of all, it gave you contact with employers. You had placements where you got to meet employers, and very often those very contacts were the ones that ended up in jobs. All the letters and all the emails that you might have sent would be for naught except that there has been this first personal contact, the employer has met you, he or she likes the work you are doing and says, ‘Listen, we might have some part-time work here for you once you’ve finished’, and so on. So that was a tremendous thing to witness, the development of VCAL at our school.

In addition to the employer contact, it also was important for self-esteem and it was important for achievement, for building of confidence. I really noticed that. In fact the VCAL kids, as I have said, were in many ways well ahead of many of the kids doing VCE in terms of just those very attributes that I have spoken about. So when the minister asked me to chair this reference group in support of John Firth and the professional team, I was delighted to see that, because I had my own views about how the thing could be further enhanced and so on.

One of the things that was mentioned at the time was that there was not a great public image about VCAL. That funnily enough was not my experience in Watsonia, I would have to say, because people saw the number of these students who were moving into employment; they were going forward. There would have been plenty of kids who did, say, the VCE who would have been on the unemployed list straight after school. I thought to myself, really, that VCAL needs to be further encouraged. How would it be further encouraged? Well, one of the problems, if you like, about it is funding. If you are running a VCAL program in a school, you are catering to a whole range of interests and backgrounds. Now, once you do that, you are starting to say with an offering, ‘We can offer, say, a carpentry-related something, music technology and so on and so forth’, but you cannot always offer all of those things as such. That became a bit of a problem, I remember, because then there would be groups of, say, two or three, which were pretty uneconomic, and other groups could not run at all. So one of the things that I would welcome in this is the understanding that money invested in VCAL, for example—let us refer to it as that—is money well spent and that we will see the benefits of that as time goes on.

What I particularly liked, if I may say, was the first meeting we had, on 28 November 2019. This was a meeting of people from government and non-government schools. But there were people there representing industry, universities and a whole range of experiences, and it was a great group to be involved with. The only thing I regret is that along came our old friend COVID, which meant that we had to suddenly go online, which is never a great thing for someone like me. But anyway, we moved from the in-person. We had perhaps four in-person meetings, but what occurred to me at the time was that really these meetings were, I think, apolitical. I did not feel there was any pointscoring or whatever. They were just to try and balance the needs of employers, for example, with the needs of teenagers, with the needs of schools and with the available financial resources and so on. It was a great experience, and I must say the work done by John Firth and his team in the department was excellent—the minutes came back quickly, investigations were conducted, schools were visited. In some ways it is almost like a study of how consultation should be conducted on something like this. In the end we came up with this review, quite a thick document, and really the way in which it has been discussed here in the house is testament to the fact that there is bipartisan support. And I am not all surprised, because of the fact that represented were all the range of interests there.

I just want to say that with this opportunity, as it develops, we will see that there will be more and more people who will take up VCAL. We do not want to think for a minute that it is VCAL versus academic and so on, because I do not think it is as simple as that. I know I was horrified when the federal government was talking about reducing money, effectively, for BA degrees as though they were a waste of time because there was no economic return and so on. I was really disappointed in that, being the proud owner of a BA. What we see here, I think, is people growing in satisfaction with their work and with their lives and that sort of thing. Then presumably, if they want to, they can move in on the academic. We see people taking up academic courses, for example, much later in life now.

It is very hard to make too many decisions when you are 18 years of age. That is why at 16, 17 and 18 there is VCAL as a possibility, with hopefully a good range of options, if that is the pathway you want to take. But nothing closes off. There is nothing to say that you cannot go back and do something that might be so-called ‘academic’. I think it has got a huge amount going for it, and they are much-needed reforms. I am very proud to be part of a government that has the passion to ensure that every student in every school has access to high-quality vocational and learning options.

I was also delighted to see greater cooperation between government and non-government schools, because my background is in non-government schooling but I have come to really enjoy and value government schools since coming into this job. It has been great to see the cooperation. VCAL is one of those things that actually brings the schools together, because you might only have one person in one school who wants to study music technology, but if there happens to be another one or two or three more from another school then there is a chance they can get together, particularly if they can sort out things like timetables and so forth.

So thank you for the opportunity to support what is generally supported. I think we will see great things come from this.

Mr J BULL (Sunbury) (13:49): I am absolutely delighted this afternoon to follow on from the very learned and very outstanding contribution from the member for Hawthorn. If you just sit back when it comes to any piece of legislation that comes before the house and listen to the member for Hawthorn’s contributions, it is absolutely well and truly worth your time. I think the wealth of experience that he as a local member brings to this house on bills such as this is incredibly important.

I am delighted to be speaking on the Education and Training Reform Amendment (Senior Secondary Pathways Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2021. This is of course another important bill that has been brought before this house that forms part of a whole range of investments, a whole range of initiatives and programs, that we on this side of the house since we have had the opportunity to be in government have brought both before the house and right across the state. This is of course the notion around the delivery of the Education State, fundamentally important to this government and all members of this side of the house, making sure that we are giving young people in this state the very best chance, the best opportunities, the best support within their local community to go on and do the things that they really want to do in life. This is yet again another important piece of legislation that does that work and, as other members have mentioned, builds upon those record investments in early childhood, in primary school, in secondary school and of course in our significant rebuild of TAFE.

I do briefly want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the incredible efforts of students, of teachers, of local school communities, particularly within my electorate, over these past two years dealing with the pandemic, dealing with all of the challenges that are presented through online learning. I do want to take this opportunity, as other members have done, to acknowledge what a significant amount of work has been done. To have the opportunity as a local member to work with your schools is one of the best parts and most enjoyable parts of this job. I am sure we do disagree on many things, but I am sure that we will not disagree on that.

It should be said, of course, that our school communities have done a remarkable job, and this government will always stand with and support our young people to be their best and do their best. We understand, though—and the member for Hawthorn touched on this in his contribution—and we know that our young people come from many different backgrounds, come from many different experiences and of course have many different interests and many different passions. This is why this piece of legislation is in my view particularly important. We want to ensure that every student has access to high-quality vocational and applied learning options. As we emerge from the pandemic and our economy undergoes that rapid change, we want the ability to provide for a greater education, making sure that all of those opportunities are there for our young people. This bill is a key element of that transformational reform: those programs that will of course create a better education system, better training pathways, for students to get the skills they need for the jobs that they want.

The bill implements recommendations from the review, as the former member spoke about and other members have spoken about this afternoon, into vocational and applied learning pathways into senior secondary schooling by former Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority CEO John Firth. We know that this was a significant and important piece of work, a piece of work that of course builds upon much of the work that was done by the Bracks Labor government in 2002, making sure that the way that the education system is inherently designed is providing those opportunities for our young people to have those important choices. The review was a significant piece of work aimed at building on the strengths of existing vocational programs to ensure consistency in delivery and quality.

The bill implements recommendations 1 and 10 of the Firth review and amends the Education and Training Reform Act 2006 to introduce a new Victorian pathways certificate and a vocational major with the Victorian certificate of education into Victoria’s senior secondary education system. The new certificate framework will replace VCAL. The bill also amends the Education and Training Reform Act to enable the Victorian Registration and Qualifications Authority to extend the transition period of superseded training products beyond 12 months. This piece of legislation that is before the house this afternoon goes to ensuring that we are providing those opportunities and making sure that we have inherently the strongest system, the best system, that we can have.

I am conscious of time, and it is late in the hour. The member for Frankston is already winding me up; it is not the first time the member for Frankston has wound me up. But I do want to give the member for Frankston an opportunity to make a contribution on this bill as well. I can see the member for Polwarth is thinking about jumping up. I do want to take this opportunity to acknowledge all of our teachers, all of those that work incredibly hard within our local school communities. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr EDBROOKE (Frankston) (13:55): Thank you so much to the member for Sunbury. Believe it or not, when I was a firefighter I actually did a bit of work in Sunbury when the member for Sunbury was teaching, and believe it or not—

A member interjected.

Mr EDBROOKE: Putting out his fires, maybe. I heard fantastic things. I heard the member was eloquent, he was a great speaker and he was inspirational to a lot of kids—so I am not sure what has happened now!

This is a fantastic bill, and they are big shoes to fill when you follow the member for Hawthorn and the member for Sunbury speaking on this bill—both teachers, both very qualified to speak on this. I too lend my support to the Education and Training Reform Amendment (Senior Secondary Pathways Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2021, which will introduce a new Victorian pathways certificate and vocational major within the Victorian certificate of education.

Now, as we heard from the member for Hawthorn—and my experience is very similar—VCAL is a very successful program in Frankston and on the Mornington Peninsula. Gone are the days when people would say, ‘This is only an option for this sort of kid’, and it was compartmentalised. I have a VCE student at home and another student looking at their options, and VCAL is actually one of those options. It is an option that I think is very, very good for a lot of students. This of course extends on that and comes out of the inquiry that the member for Hawthorn spoke about. It actually takes on board a lot of those recommendations and ensures that we are improving our schools, which in turn is improving the future for children and students and in turn actually improving the future of our communities, because these of course are our future leaders in our communities.

We have heard a fair bit about this bill from the preceding two speakers, so I would like to just go on the record and talk about some of the endorsements that we have seen. We have got, from Brauer College, Hugh Richards, who is the vice-principal. Hugh said he welcomed the new two-year vocational pathway:

Students will be able to access more aspects of the VCE subjects they like, but also at the same time start themselves down a career pathway by undertaking a VCE major …

We also had a Girton Grammar School spokesperson telling us that while the school currently only has six VCAL students, they are very keen to give them more options, saying:

Girton welcomes the changes to the delivery of the VCAL in schools, which will result in a range of choices for the senior secondary years through Years 11 and 12 …

Our students on a VCAL pathway can already access, with support if necessary, the mainstream … Curriculum, especially in numeracy and literacy, so in a sense, we are already implementing what the new model intends to support.

That is, a pathway that seamlessly combines practical work-related experience with a high standard of literacy and numeracy skills that are important for life and work.

We aim for each student to graduate with choices about their future, including those who enjoy applied learning and wish to go to TAFE or university.

On that, I also highly support this bill. I attended with my colleagues Peta Murphy, the member for Dunkley, and the member for Carrum the VCAL awards last night for Frankston and the Mornington Peninsula. Can I extend my heartfelt congratulations to those students. It was great to see how proud their families were sitting in the background, because of course it was online. Also, a big shout-out to Chisholm TAFE in Frankston and all our high schools that allow the VCAL program to be so successful. Of course we have got stage 2 of the Chisholm TAFE redevelopment just about to kick off in Frankston, which will again provide more opportunity for these students to do the courses they need to get the jobs they want, which is the whole purpose of this bill.

This bill has taken into account a lot of feedback, it has taken into account a lot of recommendations and it certainly is exactly what we need to be putting through this house and the other house at the moment. I commend the bill to the house.

Following speeches incorporated in accordance with resolution of house of 7 October:

Mr EREN (Lara)

It is my pleasure to contribute today to the Education and Training Reform Amendment (Senior Secondary Pathways Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2021.

This bill will implement key recommendations for the review into vocational and applied learning (VCAL) pathways in senior secondary schooling by the former Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority CEO John Firth.

From the outset, can I start by thanking the Minister for Education and his hardworking team for their tremendous work right across their portfolio, but in particularly on this program.

This bill implements recommendations 1 and 10 of the Firth review recommendations.

This bill amends the Education and Training Reform Act 2006 (the Education and Training Reform Act) to introduce a new Victorian pathways certificate (VPC) and vocational major within the Victorian certificate of education (VCE) into Victoria’s senior secondary education system.

This new certificate framework will replace VCAL.

The bill also amends the Education and Training Reform Act to enable the Victorian Registration and Qualifications Authority (VRQA) to extend the transition period of superseded training products beyond 12 months.

Specifically, this bill:

o introduces new definitions of a foundation secondary course and foundation secondary qualifications to accommodate the VPC;

o allows the (VRQA to register the VPC on the state register, register providers to deliver the course and register the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA) to award the qualification;

o enables the supported transition of providers and students to the new certificate scheme in time for it to commence in 2023;

o creates offences for providing or offering to provide the new type of course, or awarding or offering to award the new type of qualification without registration;

o allows the VRQA to extend the transition period of superseded training packages beyond 12 months where it is satisfied that there would be a disadvantage to students if the extension were not granted or where exceptional circumstances exist, thereby aligning Victorian standards with the national VET regulator, the Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA), and the Western Australian Training Accreditation Council (WATAC); and

o provides the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) with power to review a decision of the VRQA to extend the transition period of superseded training packages beyond 12 months.

From 2023, Victorian students will begin to move to a single integrated senior secondary certificate, recognising academic and applied learning opportunities.

As a father of five children, one girl and five boys, and being blessed with another three grandchildren, I fully understand the need for better educational pathways for our children.

Even within one family, there is no mould.

Children are all so beautifully different and so uniquely individual.

Within my own family, I saw how each child approached their education differently and how different their goals and therefore pathway from secondary school to adult life were.

As a child, and as a parent, navigating pathways that will help guide your children into starting their adult lives is as monumental as it is terrifying.

There is no mould and each child’s needs and wants are so vastly different.

That’s why this legislation is so important.

And it’s also why I am so proud to be a member of this government.

In Victoria, we are the Education State.

We want every child in every school to have access to high-quality vocational and applied learning opportunities.

It’s so important that our senior secondary system is best positioned to assist our students to build the skills and capabilities to thrive in further education and training with the goal of moving towards a rewarding career.

This is also key to our economy as it undergoes rapid change, emerging from the pandemic.

High-quality training for our workforce will be critical to this recovery and for our future prosperity.

This bill implements recommendations 1 and 10 of the Firth review recommendations.

Since the Victorian certificate of applied learning was introduced by the Bracks Labor government in 2002, it has made a significant contribution to keeping many young Victorians engaged in education and training, helping them to build strong links with the community and capturing the creative energy generated through partnerships between training providers, industry and local businesses.

In late 2019, the Andrews Labor government called for a review into how vocational education is designed and delivered in our state’s secondary schools.

The Firth review aimed to build on the strengths of existing vocational programs and ensure consistency in their delivery and quality.

It consulted widely with stakeholders.

Their views, experiences and opinions were used as evidence to develop the review’s findings and recommendations.

The Firth review found major changes were needed to make sure all Victorian secondary students have access to high-quality vocational training and applied learning options that meet their strengths and interests, gives them the skills they need, and leads them into further training, education and, ultimately, a great job.

It recommended that Victoria move to an integrated senior secondary certificate, with vocational education embedded in the VCE.

In doing so, this certificate will replace the existing standalone VCAL certificate, thereby giving all students the opportunity to develop both academic and practical skills.

It also recommended a new foundation pathways certificate should be created to formally recognise the skills and achievements of students who are not ready to complete year 12.

The purpose of this will be to support those students to make successful post-school transitions.

This will be particularly important for students with a disability and additional needs, and for students experiencing personal challenges.

Other key recommendations of the Firth review:

o All students who fully or partially complete vocational and applied learning subjects should receive an enhanced statement of results to provide a full picture of their strengths, capabilities and achievements when they finish school.

o Schools should receive more support to deliver vocational and applied learning. This can be achieved by improving teachers’ training in vocational education and reducing operational and administrative burdens on schools.

o Further work must be done to build school-industry partnerships to provide students with more industry and employer exposure, to better track how schools are providing students with work-related learning opportunities and to increase awareness among industry professionals of the benefits and opportunities of teaching VET to students.

This bill amends the Education and Training Reform Act 2006 to introduce a new Victorian pathways certificate and vocational major within the Victorian certificate of education into Victoria’s senior secondary education system.

This new certificate framework will replace VCAL.

The new Victorian pathways certificate and vocational major within the VCE will provide an integrated certificate framework that includes a more rigorous and detailed curriculum.

The certificates will build on the best elements of VCAL, including the flexibility to provide senior secondary students with an education that is engaging, based in real life and delivers in-demand skills for the future world of work.

From 2023, a vocational specialisation stream within the VCE will replace the existing VCAL at the intermediate and senior levels as we move towards a single integrated senior secondary certificate by 2025.

Similarly, for students who aren’t ready or able to undertake the VCE, the new Victorian pathways certificate will provide an enriched curriculum, more subjects and excellent support for students to develop the skills, capabilities and qualities for success in personal and civic life.

The Victorian pathways certificate will be particularly important for students with additional needs, and for students re-engaging in education.

Students completing a Victorian pathways certificate will be well equipped to transition into senior secondary, further education and training or employment.

From 2025, senior secondary students will complete a fully integrated VCE, which will combine academic and applied learning for all students, aligned with their strengths, interests and career aspirations and prepare students for diverse post-school pathways.

As a result of these reforms, all students will have access to:

o a single senior secondary certificate incorporating the best aspects of VCAL into our world-class VCE

o access to a broader range of high-quality VET courses

o jobs, skills and pathways coordination funding for every government secondary school for better career advice and ties to industry

o a wider selection of high-quality school-based apprenticeships and traineeships in growth industries

o greater support and accountability for schools to support students in all pathways.

This bill is another piece of legislation which showcases our government’s commitment to Victoria being the Education State.

We are delivering every day for our students, and since 2018–19, the Andrews Labor government has invested $315.5 million in reforming the senior secondary school system to prepare students for successful careers of the future.

The 2020–21 state budget invested $38 million to commence reforms to vocational and applied learning in senior secondary schooling.

This funding ensures high-quality vocational and applied learning is available to every senior secondary student, no matter where they go to school.

And there are so many other great examples, over this term of government and before, that are supporting our students to ensure they have the best facilities to learn in, programs to support their future goals and access to many opportunities.

My electorate of Lara is benefiting heavily from our government’s commitment.

Record amounts of funding are coming to my electorate to deliver the best facilities for our local schools, including capital works programs at local schools such as Northern Bay College and Nelson Park School.

There have been many other funding streams our schools have benefited from, including shade sail grants, non-government capital works grants, planned maintenance funding, disability inclusion packages, school breakfast programs, grants for solar packages, our doctors in schools program and many, many more.

I’ve always said: what if the cure for cancer is in the mind of a student who couldn’t afford an education?

This bill complements the hard work and investment our government is making to ensure that this is not a factor for any student in Victoria, regardless of where they live or what resources they have.

That’s why I commend this bill to the house and wish it a speedy passage.

Ms CRUGNALE (Bass)

As parents, we want the best for our kids. Nearly every generation, for at least the last 100 years, has wanted their kids to have a better life than they had. Most of the time they didn’t actually know what that meant or what it looked like.

I suppose it meant an easier life, a less physically demanding life; better things in the home; and certainly more education. Back in the day, being the first to go to university was something to be proud of in a family. Education became a marker of success, and rapidly evolving technology brought change at an unparalleled speed.

People didn’t just use computers as a tool, it became a whole industry in itself. ‘I work in IT’ was, and still is, commonly heard.

I think it is true that for a time, as a society, we placed less worth on trades and vocational education. As tertiary education became more widespread and available, getting your hands dirty was not as glamourous, not as desirable as having a degree and a desk job.

The other thing that wasn’t considered was a pathway. You left school. You either got a job, an apprenticeship or, as I discussed, went to university. There was no pathway, there were only options and often they were limited, largely based on economics, gender and family history.

In my electorate of Bass, this changing nature of education can be seen through the story of Wonthaggi. Traditionally a town based on the state coal mine, the Wonthaggi Technical School opened in 1922. In 1969, a separate Wonthaggi High School was established at a different site. When they joined in 1988, the tech school site was retained but it lost its name and became part of the Wonthaggi Secondary College. The final nail came when the wonderful new senior campus opened in 2020, again at a new site, and purpose-built for the future and funded by our government. Time has again moved on with the recent renaming to Bass Coast College.

I thank this Andrews Labor government for commissioning the Firth review in 2019. Thank you for thinking laterally about education and caring about all students. The Firth review or Review into Vocational and Applied Learning Pathways in Senior Secondary Schooling had two main aims.

Firstly, to ensure that all Victorian secondary school students have access to high-quality vocational and applied learning options. Secondly, to look for ways to improve transitions for students between school, post-secondary education and work.

The certificate reforms are part of 38 recommendations made by the former CEO of the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority, or VCAA, Mr John Firth.

He begins his report by thanking the Deputy Premier and Minister for Education and I know we all share his gratitude.

The review recommendations provide a road map for reform, building on our Andrews Labor government’s historic investment of $315.5 million in senior secondary schooling reforms since 2018.

Tech schools still exist, they still partner with local industry and community groups. Students in the north of my electorate can access Casey Tech, which is a shared learning facility for students from 23 secondary schools in the Casey region.

Life is a journey, and that junction in the road between school and the onset of adulthood is one of the most crucial intersections of our life. Whichever path we take leads us somewhere.

Which is why Victoria is restructuring our senior secondary certificates so that we give our young adults more options and clearer paths. We are moving to a single certificate, bringing together the Victorian certificate of education or VCE and the Victorian certificate of applied learning or VCAL. This is a big change and will occur in two stages: stage 1 in 2023 and stage 2 in 2025.

This bill will deliver two new options for students in their final years of school from 2023. These are the Victorian pathways certificate, or VPC, and the Victorian certificate of education vocational major, or VCE VM.

From 2023, a vocational specialisation stream within the VCE will replace the existing foundation VCAL. This stream will provide a more robust and detailed curriculum. It will include a diverse range of assessment strategies.

The new VCE VM program requires students to complete three literacy units. This has had widespread support, as has the ability to complete units 1 and 2 in any order, rather than on a sequential semester basis as is required for other VCE studies. We want our young adults to be prepared for whatever path they take, and this acknowledges that literacy is a vital life skill.

As we farewell the foundation VCAL, we also acknowledge that it has been a recognised qualification, focussing on more ‘hands-on’ learning with the pathway leading to TAFE or VET courses. We also thank the former Premier of Victoria, Steve Bracks, for introducing the VCAL almost 20 years ago, in 2002. A true Labor stalwart, he showed the way forward by so many reforms.

Despite the wonderful opportunities that the VCAL has given our young people, the Firth review found that some students avoided VCAL as they thought it was of lesser value than the VCE. John Firth describes ‘image problems that dog VCAL’ and adds that VCAL is seen as ‘the other’ and is ‘defined by what it is not’.

This restructure, or merging VCAL with the VCE, will give students more flexibility with subject selection. Being contained within the VCE banner acknowledges that education can take many forms. Each is as worthy as the other.

While the VCAL will integrate into the VCE, the new pathways certificate will bring more opportunities to more Victorian students. It is particularly suited to students who have missed periods of school or students with additional needs.

It is designed to support students to transition either to the VCE or the entry level VET or employment. This additional pathway option will help vulnerable students at risk of leaving education. It will give more students more ability to connect or reconnect. It will open more doors and give them more chances to grow and re-engage with learning and study.

Stakeholders have welcomed the proposed wider range of electives that the VPC will offer compared to VCAL, and the opportunities to tailor the program to their aspirations. The VPC curriculum will allow schools with small numbers to co-deliver some units.

Our government consults, and almost 6000 survey responses were received. More than 2740 stakeholders attended the 17 webinars for schools and providers. The list of stakeholders is too long to detail in the time allowed. I do again thank the Minister for Education and the Minister for Training and Skills, along with the portfolio of higher education, the Honourable Gayle Tierney. As the member in the other house for Western Victoria, she also understands the difficulties facing our students in rural and regional Victoria.

Once accredited, the VPC and the VCE VM will be formally launched next year.

Stage 2 will occur in 2025, when a fully integrated senior secondary certificate will be introduced across Victoria. More details and opportunities to engage in the design of the integrated certificate will occur in 2022.

Victoria is, and will continue to be, the Education State. The 2020–21 budget invested $38 million to commence these reforms, and the 2021–22 budget invests a further $26.6 million to pay for essential learning materials for students undertaking VET within their senior secondary certificate, reducing the financial burden of schooling on families.

The new certificates deliberately cater for the most vulnerable students and retain the flexibility of the VCAL program. Most importantly, these changes remove the perception that there are two classes of senior school education in our state. It respects the integrity of every student in mapping a pathway for their future.

While it is their future, it is our responsibility to provide the best road map and these changes do that.

Mr BRAYNE (Nepean)

I rise today to speak on the Education and Training Amendment (Senior Pathways Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2021.

The Andrews government is committed to providing each and every Victorian student with the highest quality vocational and applied learning options.

Victoria is the Education State and this government understands the importance of education to our young people.

Whether it is through Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) or the Victorian Certificate of Applied Learning (VCAL), having access to a high-quality education is essential for our young people to develop the skills and capabilities they need to move into further education and a rewarding career.

Education and training are so important to my community, and we have several great secondary schools and learning institutions in my electorate of Nepean.

One of those is Rosebud Secondary College, which is currently undergoing a $10 million rebuild thanks to an investment from this government.

I know that students at Rosebud Secondary College and Dromana College have been working so hard to complete their studies throughout this pandemic.

The past two years have been so difficult for students across our state, and I want to recognise the dedication and perseverance that all students in Nepean have shown under these exceptional circumstances.

As we emerge from this pandemic and our economy undergoes significant change, our ability to provide for high quality education and training for our workforce will be critical to Victoria’s economic recovery.

Students who graduate secondary school over the next few years will play an important role in entering higher education and the workforce and contributing to Victoria’s future prosperity.

That is why it is so important that our secondary school system can help students develop their skills and capabilities.

As such, this bill takes significant steps towards providing our secondary students with the tools they need to thrive in further education and training, and move into a rewarding career.

This bill implements key recommendations from the review into vocational and applied learning pathways in senior secondary education that was led by former Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority CEO John Firth.

The VCAL pathway has been so important in keeping many young people engaged in education and training.

As such, this government called for a review into how Victoria’s vocational education is designed and delivered in our secondary schools.

This review, known as the Firth review, aimed to build on the strengths of Victoria’s existing vocational programs to ensure that there was consistency in the delivery and quality of these programs.

After consulting widely with stakeholders in the education and training industry, the Firth review found major changes were needed to ensure that Victorian secondary school students can access high-quality vocational training and applied learning courses.

Such changes will better allow these students to meet their strengths and interests, while also giving them the skills they need to enter further training, education and, ultimately, a rewarding job.

The main recommendation of the Firth review was that Victoria move to an integrated senior secondary certificate that incorporated vocational education into the existing VCE.

As such, the review suggested that this new integrated certificate replace the existing VCAL certificate.

By incorporating vocational training and applied learning into the VCE certificate, all students will have the opportunity to develop both academic and practical skills, leading to a more holistic approach to learning that will ultimately benefit our young people.

The Firth review also recommended that a new foundations pathway certificate be created to recognise students who are not ready to complete year 12.

This new certificate will help to support these students to make successful post-school transitions, with this being particularly important for young people with disabilities and additional needs, as well as young people who have experienced personal challenges during their time at secondary school.

The Firth review also recommended:

• That all students who fully or partially complete vocational and applied learning subjects receive a statement of results to provide an accurate account of their achievements when they finish secondary school.

• That schools receive more support for providing vocational and applied learning programs.

• That more work be done to strengthen school and industry partnerships to provide students with more industry and employer exposure and work-related opportunities, and to increase awareness among industry professionals of the benefits of teaching VET courses to students.

By passing this bill and implementing the reforms of the Firth review, we will help to ensure that our young people can receive a great education and develop strong life skills that will allow them to make informed choices about further study, jobs and their futures.

In doing so, our young people will be able to contribute to and benefit from the growth of Victoria’s economy as we recover from the pandemic.

Most importantly, by implementing this bill, we will be able to prepare our young people for active and fulfilling lives in the wider community.

I will now turn to the specifics of this legislation.

This bill will implement recommendations 1 and 10 of the Firth review.

This bill will also amend the Education and Training Reform Act 2006 to introduce a new Victorian pathways certificate (VPC) and vocational major within the VCE into Victoria’s senior secondary education system.

As such, this bill will replace VCAL with the Victorian pathways certificate.

This new Victorian pathways certificate and the vocational major within the VCE will provide secondary school students with an integrated certificate framework that includes a more rigorous and detailed curriculum.

While the Victorian pathways certificate will replace VCAL, it will also build on the best elements of that certificate, including the flexibility it has provided to senior secondary school students who are seeking education that is based in real life.

This bill will also establish a vocational specialisation stream within the VCE in 2023, which will replace the existing VCAL at the intermediate and senior levels as our state’s education system moves towards a single integrated senior secondary certificate by 2025.

For students who are not ready to or are unable to undertake the VCE, the Victorian pathways certificate will provide them with a stronger curriculum, more subjects and increased support.

The Victorian pathways certificate will also help these students to develop the skills and capabilities for them to find success in and engage with community life.

This will be particularly important for students with additional needs and for students who are re-engaging with education.

As such, all students who complete a Victorian pathways certificate will be well equipped to enter senior secondary and further education, as well as training and employment.

Finally, from 2025, all senior secondary students will complete a fully integrated VCE that combines academic and applied learning for all our students.

This fully integrated VCE will align with the strengths, interests and career aspirations of our young people, and will help to prepare our students for a variety of post-school pathways.

Overall, these reforms will:

• create a single senior secondary certificate that incorporates the best parts of VCAL into VCE;

• provide students with access to a range of high-quality VET courses;

• provide jobs, skills and pathways coordination funding for every government secondary school; and

• provide greater support and accountability for schools to support students in all pathways.

This government is committed to providing all our young people with access to the best education, and this bill is just another example of how this government is working hard to deliver high quality education and training opportunities for secondary school students.

Since 2018–19, the Andrews government has invested over $315 million into reforming the senior secondary school system, with the 2020–21 state budget investing $38 million to commence reforms to vocational and applied learning in senior secondary schooling.

This government has prioritised the education of our young people and has consistently backed up its commitments with significant investment, as well as various initiatives that are improving education outcomes for all Victorian students.

This bill and its changes to our secondary school education system are no exception and will benefit our young people for years to come.

Our society becomes more prosperous when our young people have access to high-quality education.

Victorians understand this, and that is why we are the Education State.

As such, I am proud to say I support this legislation and I commend this bill to the house.

Mr HAMER (Box Hill)

It is a pleasure to rise and speak in favour of the Education and Training Reform Amendment (Senior Secondary Pathways and Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2021.

The bill being debated today will make significant improvements to our education system in Victoria, and the education options available for young people in Box Hill.

Before I speak on the critical changes this legislation makes, it is important to understand the context for these adjustments to the Victorian education system.

As a government, we are absolutely committed to our world-class Victorian education system. We know and understand the importance of investment in education. Over the past six years alone, we have invested over $9.3 billion into Victorian schools—it’s a phenomenal figure. But we know there is always more to do, and we’re committed to delivering just that.

Young Victorians, including in my electorate in Box Hill, are keen to have more choices about how they learn and prepare for their futures. It is therefore crucial that Victorian students have access to high-quality senior school pathways, whether that be through VCE or a vocational pathway.

In 2019, the Andrews government asked John Firth, the former head of VCAA, to conduct a review looking at how we can ensure all Victorian secondary school students have access to high-quality vocational and applied learning options. Importantly, the review also investigated how we can improve the transition out of the school environment and into the workplace.

After almost a year of detailed work, Firth reported back to government with a series of recommendations, which were focused on lifting the quality, accessibility and perception of vocational education and ensuring pathways equip students with the skills they need.

As a government, we accepted every single recommendation, and the bill before us today goes a long way to making Firth’s vision a reality.

The education, training and reform amendment bill will revolutionise the way we deliver vocational education in Victoria.

In essence, VCAL is being replaced. Foundational VCAL will be replaced by the new Victorian pathways certificate, while intermediate and senior VCAL are set to be replaced by a new vocational major as part of the VCE.

These are important changes that address two of Firth’s key recommendations.

Firstly, Firth highlighted the need for an integrated senior secondary certificate which builds upon the success of the standalone VCAL program.

Additionally, Firth also called on the government to introduce a ‘pathways certificate’ for students not ready to undertake their VCE studies.

Undertaking these reforms will have significant benefits for students across our state, and indeed in the Box Hill electorate. Young people will be able to develop improved academic and practical skills, while also becoming more prepared for the post-school world.

It also means by 2025, students studying the vocational major VCE will be able to mix and match their applied learning with traditional VCE subjects, which represents a massive step forward for Victoria’s education and training system.

It shouldn’t be understated, though—this is a bold reform: abolishing VCAL, creating a new vocational major in the VCE and introducing the Victorian pathways certificate.

But as a government, we are absolutely committed to seeing these reforms through, and putting in the effort to ensure it is done properly. This bill does just that.

It’s important that no current VCAL students get left behind, so we have created a 12-month window for current students to complete their studies.

The Victorian Qualifications Authority will have the ability to extend that window, either on its own accord, or if they receive an application to do so.

That process needs to occur fairly, so VCAT will be given the powers to review any decisions the VRQA makes about these extensions.

Our reforms also represent a big leap forward for current VCAL providers and registered training organisations, which is why the bill makes the transition easy for these stakeholders, as well.

Providers already licenced and permitted to deliver foundation VCAL will be automatically registered and permitted to deliver the Victorian pathways certificate. Similarly, providers already licensed and permitted to deliver intermediate and senior VCAL will automatically be registered to deliver the VCE and vocational major.

These are significant changes, but we are committed to doing this—and doing it right. So many young people who live or study in my electorate are set to benefit from these great reforms.

In particular, I want to draw the house’s attention to the outstanding opportunities being delivered by Box Hill Senior Secondary College, an excellent public school in the heart of my electorate.

Box Hill Senior Secondary College has an outstanding reputation in the community, not just providing their students with pathways to employment and further study, but for making their students thrive.

Whether it be through VCE, school-based apprenticeships, vocational training or their elite sporting programs, local young people have pathways into the workforce, or in the case of many of their students, to the esteemed US college basketball circuit.

Under the leadership of principal Warren Dawson and his determined focus on improving educational outcomes, forging connections with industry and creating pathways for each and every student, the school has gone from strength to strength.

The changes being debated today recognise our commitment to lifting vocational education in Victoria to new heights. They will improve outcomes for students at Box Hill Senior Secondary, and indeed at many schools across the state, by giving young people more choices and building workforce capacity in critical fields.

This improved quality and accessibility of vocational education is particularly great news for the Box Hill electorate given the massive demand in the community for skilled young people. Whether they be tradespeople, builders, electricians or mental health workers—young, skilled Victorians are in high demand.

By improving the quality and accessibility of vocational training now, we can build workforce capacity for the years to come and create thousands of work-ready Victorians to contribute to our government’s bold investment in the Box Hill community, and beyond.

Whether it is the Big Housing Build, the Level Crossing Removal Project, the Suburban Rail Loop, the overhauled mental health system or new and upgraded schools and hospitals—each of these initiatives is creating opportunities for young Victorians. The reforms being debated today are set to create the next generation of skilled Victorians, which is excellent news for young people and our economy.

It means more choices and brighter futures for all young Victorians.

It is for this reason, for our future, that I commend this bill to the house.

Ms RYAN (Euroa)

This bill seeks to remove the distinction between VCE and VCAL through the introduction of a new Victorian pathways certificate (VPC).

There are two distinct purposes and outcomes in the current system as students make decisions about their future employment at the end of year 10 in order to begin senior secondary education. VCAL and VCE have worked in tandem for a number of years now to allow students who have different needs and aspirations to select subjects, courses and outcomes that best suit their objectives.

This has been a recommendation of the review undertaken by John Firth, the former chief executive of the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority, into vocational and applied learning pathways in senior secondary schooling.

At the heart of these changes is greater educational choice and that’s something that The Nationals strongly support. Choice in education, however, is not something that is usually in Labor’s wheelhouse. You only need to look at what is occurring in Shepparton, where the state government has ridden roughshod over the local community to amalgamate four public secondary schools to establish the Greater Shepparton Secondary College. Those schools are currently preparing to transition to one site next year.

By amalgamating these schools, Labor has stripped the local community of choice in public education. Shepparton has become an experiment for the government. We all know that there are some serious difficulties within the education sector that need addressing, but simply forcing everyone onto one campus—and a small one at that—is not going to solve the complex social issues which are at the heart of this issue.

It is bizarre to me that Labor and the local MP decided, without properly consulting the community, that the best way to improve education outcomes was to build a new secondary school. Ask any expert in the field, and they will tell you that if you want real change, you need to start with early childhood.

Educational standards are incredibly important to regional communities and their social cohesion, never more so than in the wake of the pandemic that has disrupted the lives of so many and amplified the hardship many families experience. The demographics of Shepparton provide several challenges and opportunities as the community establishes itself as a wonderful example of a diverse and multicultural Australia.

With term 4 already well underway there is considerable anxiety in the Shepparton community about the removal of alternative secondary public schooling options. The old Shepparton High School site will house around 2400 students that were previously spread across four locations in Shepparton and Mooroopna. This poses multiple logistical challenges and reflects a lack of ambition from the government for the students and families of Greater Shepparton. The new site will have the capability to house 2700 students at a maximum. Meeting this threshold may not be as far in the future as the government thinks as our regions continue to grow.

With this in mind, I strongly urge the government to consider the long-term needs of the Shepparton community rather than sticking firm to their belief that new buildings and no choice for parents will solve the issues identified in the Shepparton Education Plan. The government and the Department of Education must genuinely engage with the community and provide a plan for the use of the sites at McGuire, Mooroopna and Wanganui Secondary College which will sit empty from next year. I call on the Andrews government to give the community a commitment that it will not sell off these campuses before a genuine conversation is held with the community about what education should look like in Shepparton. Selling these campuses off fails to consider the needs to the community as it grows and locks the community in to one campus for the foreseeable future.

It will only leave families frustrated down the line as the ‘super-school’ reaches it absolute capacity. Many in the community want to see the continued use of these sites to cater for the individual needs of students. These campuses, which under the government’s current plan will be abandoned at the end of the year, could continue to effectively function in 2022. The existing infrastructure can allow for students to attend specific sites based on their educational desires and future aspirations. As it currently stands I am being contacted regularly by parents who are so concerned about the plan for next year they are enrolling their students at other public schools in the region such as Numurkah, Cobram and Kyabram, which places a further degree of stress on families who feel the education system is letting them down due to a complete lack of public schooling choice.

Let’s consider the township of Mooroopna, which was previously home to its own independent secondary college. As of next year, all families with secondary students will have to make the decision to send their children permanently to the new school site in Shepparton or fork out for a private school education, if they can get a place. I am not denying the fact that Mooroopna Secondary College was falling behind in its educational outcomes, but to have a town of around 8000 people unserviced by a secondary college in any capacity is incredibly concerning. This is symptomatic of the government’s continual lack of understanding of regional areas and their inability to distinguish between the townships of Mooroopna and Shepparton reflects this. The fact that Mooroopna was experiencing poor educational outcomes should not encourage the government to place a further obstacle in front of Mooroopna children by bussing them into Shepparton and back every day just so they can attend school. The government should be supporting students in their own communities, such as Mooroopna, rather than making the act of attending school even more difficult.

The concerns of families around the super-school model have been well documented in the media and there are legitimate concerns regarding safety in the wake of several incidents documented throughout the merging of the pre-existing secondary colleges. We need to provide choice for students not just in terms of curriculum but also future pathways and attendance options.

I support the government’s decision to adjust the existing senior secondary schooling system but urge them to consider how important choice is in the education system and their hypocrisy in denying any sort of choice to the families of the Greater Shepparton region heading into 2022.

The SPEAKER: That was very well timed, member for Frankston. It takes us right through to the time set down under the resolution of the house for consideration of items on the government business program, so I am required to interrupt business.

Motion agreed to.

Read second time.

Third reading

Motion agreed to.

Read third time.

The SPEAKER: The bill will now be sent to the Legislative Council and their agreement requested.

Health Legislation Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2021

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Mr PEARSON:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Motion agreed to.

Read second time.

Third reading

Motion agreed to.

Read third time.

The SPEAKER: The bill will now be sent to the Legislative Council and their agreement requested.

Terrorism (Community Protection) Amendment Bill 2021

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Ms HUTCHINS:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Motion agreed to.

Read second time.

Third reading

Motion agreed to.

Read third time.

The SPEAKER: The bill will now be sent to the Legislative Council and their agreement requested.

Children, Youth and Families Amendment (Child Protection) Bill 2021

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Mr PEARSON:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Motion agreed to.

Read second time.

Third reading

Motion agreed to.

Read third time.

The SPEAKER: The bill will now be sent to the Legislative Council and their agreement requested.

Business interrupted under resolution of house of 7 October.

The SPEAKER: The time appointed under the resolution of the house for me to interrupt business has now arrived. The house is now adjourned.

House adjourned 2.02 pm until Tuesday, 26 October.

Members statements

Following statements incorporated in accordance with resolution of house of 7 October:

Werribee electorate teachers

Mr PALLAS (Werribee—Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Industrial Relations)

I acknowledge to the house some of our exceptional teachers in my electorate of Werribee.

Teachers have displayed incredible resilience and commitment to their role in the support for students during the particularly challenging remote learning periods and return to the classroom.

Some of Werribee’s long-serving educators have recently reached a truly remarkable milestone:

- Ruth Cusack of Werribee Secondary College and

- Bryan Woollard of Wyndham Central Secondary College

Ruth and Bryan have both reached 40 years of teaching service.

An extra special milestone of 50 years teaching service is to be acknowledged:

- Christina Dodd of Woodville Primary School

Congratulations to Christina, Ruth and Bryan—an incredible effort on dedicating so many years to delivering a fantastic education for local students. I know all members of our community appreciate their decades of commitment to their role in our Education State in Victoria.

I also acknowledge a local teacher nominated for an outstanding teacher award:

- Kimberley Zammit of Warringa Park School

This award recognises Kimberley’s effective and innovative approach that has demonstrated excellence in teaching practices and her significant contribution to improving student achievement, engagement and wellbeing.

The Victorian Education Excellence Awards show how valued these teachers are in our local school communities.

I wish Kimberley all the best for the awards coming up on 22 October.

Thank you to all educators in Wyndham for your outstanding work that is proven every single day.

Ambulance response times

Mr BATTIN (Gembrook)

A call to 000 must never be a coin toss between getting a response or being placed on hold.

In the last few weeks, two people suffering cardiac arrest died after calls to 000 went unanswered for 5 minutes, and emergency calls in other life-threatening situations had been left on hold for 33 minutes.

Victorian lives have been placed at risk by the Andrews Labor government’s failure to meaningfully increase critical 000 call-taking staff throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority (ESTA) CEO Marty Smyth has confirmed that despite 18 months of COVID-19 cases and consistently increasing call volumes to his organisation, critical ambulance call-taking staff have increased by less than 0.5 per cent.

I say again: critical ambulance call-taking staff have increased by less than half a per cent, at a time when we have seen increasing caseloads and calls to ambulance services skyrocketing not only in other parts of Australia but all around the world.

The Premier and the Minister for Emergency Services have had more than 18 months to get ready and to train enough new staff so people are not dying or suffering severe complications while waiting for their calls to be answered.

How can we still not be ready?

And again, we see arguments between the Andrews Labor government and their agencies over the use of Australian Defence Force personnel to help fill the gaps in their COVID-19 response. The ESTA CEO said ADF would be used, and the Minister for Emergency Services said this week that no such decision had been made.

Lives are being lost as a direct result of the government’s failure to plan and act.

The Andrews Labor government needs to be better than this. Victorians deserve nothing less.

Mill Park electorate students

Ms D’AMBROSIO (Mill Park—Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change, Minister for Solar Homes)

• I would like to congratulate years 11 and 12 students from Epping Secondary College in my electorate of Mill Park for their community spirit and hard work in helping those in need during these trying times.

• Since March and in between lockdowns about 25 VCAL students have been working hard in the garden of the Greenbrook Community House, digging, mulching, planting and watering seasonal vegetables for the purpose of helping community members in need of extra support during COVID-19 lockdowns.

• Led by their dedicated teachers Antoinette Rehak and Giovanna Hill, these students have demonstrated what it means to give back.

• When their hard work started to pay off, the students donated the harvest to food relief charities including Countrywide Community Missions Victoria in the Mill Park electorate.

• And these diligent students didn’t limit their gardening activities to their veggie patch but looked after the whole garden of the community house. Thanks to their efforts, the grounds of Greenbrook Community House have also improved.

• Initiatives like this have multiple benefits for the students, their wellbeing and the wider community. They promote physical activity and teamwork amongst the students. They provide a sense of pride and responsibility for the outcome of their effort, encourage our young adults to engage with their wider community and empower them as they can actively see the positive difference they can make through their hard work.

• I am so proud to represent such a group of students in my electorate, and I wish to thank them for their dedication to our community.

COVID-19 vaccinations

Mr McCURDY (Ovens Valley)

Congratulations and a massive thankyou to the people of the Ovens Valley for stepping up to do their bit in the vaccination race. Rural City of Wangaratta and Moira shire are over 95 per cent first dose vaccinated and the Alpine shire is just a fraction behind but still outstanding at 93 per cent plus.

Keeping our families safe should be our first priority, but keeping our community safe is just as important. We are nearing the end of a very long 18 months, and may I thank everyone who has worked so hard to look out for each other and support local businesses where possible.

We have lost so many events and activities but new ones are just around the corner so we can get back to normal. I am still uncomfortable with the Victorian Labor government’s mandatory vaccination for authorised workers. Although I support vaccination, I also believe genuine choice should be an option, not a choice where your livelihood relies on that choice. That’s not a choice, that’s blackmail. A real choice would have been more regular rapid tests for unvaccinated people which would buy people more time to decide which way they want to go.

I have many businesses contacting our office concerned as to how they will keep their doors open when unvaccinated staff finish up. Please be patient; retailers need our support not our impatience.

The Premier has overreached on this occasion but as a community we will all work together to look out for each and every one. Make sure we all reach out to friends and colleagues next week to see how they are travelling. Some will be doing it tough. I’m so proud of the way we have worked together so far. Keep up the great work.

Bellarine electorate community associations

Ms NEVILLE (Bellarine—Minister for Water, Minister for Police)

At a time when strong and supportive communities are more important than ever, I take this opportunity to acknowledge the invaluable work of all the community associations and their members across the Bellarine.

The Bellarine is a great place to live, and in no small part this is because residents, through their town’s community associations, have worked hard to protect and advocate for their town and surrounds.

As local member, I have been proud to have worked with each of the associations, all led by dedicated, hardworking and well-informed residents.

And I know that as a result of their work it is accurate to say that every town on the Bellarine has benefitted significantly through the ongoing upgrade of community infrastructure and services.

Presently, the state government is working to protect the environment, landscape and lifestyle of the Bellarine having declared the peninsula a distinctive area and landscape.

Reflective of their input, each community association has effectively contributed to the consultation process, ensuring that this important declaration when implemented will protect the region for generations to come.

Of course, community safety is important to local residents and many of their community association representatives also contribute their time and effort to the Bellarine Community Safety Group.

Again, I thank and commend each Bellarine community association for their ongoing work and commitment, led by people such as: Ingrid Novosel, Phil Walters, Mercedes Drummond, Anne Brackley, David Connoley, Michelle Jepson, David Kenwood, Fay Agterhuis, Phil Edwards, Geoff Fary, Christine Kelly and Sandy Gatehouse.

Community banks

Ms BRITNELL (South-West Coast)

The Andrews Labor government’s state purchasing contract is forgetting about local communities like Port Fairy and Heywood who will be severely impacted by the centralised banking approach.

With the big four banks closing branches in towns across my electorate, people have been turning to local community banks, which are what their title suggests—for the community, donating profits back to local groups and organisations.

Rather than supporting this the state government is now moving all its accounts away from these organisations and forcing all government accounts to be directed through Westpac.

This means in Port Fairy, Moyne Health Services and the local school’s accounts will be removed from the local community bank and taken to Westpac.

The same will happen in Heywood and mean that these two community banks will lose some of their biggest customers.

The Port Fairy community bank has been operating for seven years and in that time has made more than $500 000 worth of contributions to local groups like the local show, the surf club, historical society, schools, church groups—the list goes on.

The Heywood branch has made a similar level of donations—with one of the major beneficiaries being the town’s health service.

By comparison, the ANZ has recently closed its branch, as have the NAB and Commonwealth banks. It’s the same in Heywood, where the community bank is the sole survivor.

The government’s purchasing contract once again shows the city-centric, centralised nature of how Labor operates. Instead of supporting local organisations that are part of the community and give back to local groups and organisations, the government is rewarding the big four, who have done nothing but abandon rural and regional towns across the state.

This policy needs to be reviewed so small community banks that give back to the communities they serve aren’t disadvantaged, and I call on the Treasurer to do so with a level of urgency.

COVID-19 vaccinations

Ms HUTCHINS (Sydenham—Minister for Crime Prevention, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice, Minister for Victim Support)

• Speaker, I wish to acknowledge the hard work of our vaccination centres, GPs and pharmacies to help the residents of Sydenham achieve our vaccine targets.

• There has been considerable uptake of vaccinations since the Andrews Labor government launched a targeted vaccine blitz in the west and the introduction of the Moderna vaccine at walk-up clinics.

• That includes a rise of 4.5 per cent in first-dose rates across Brimbank and 6.5 per cent in Melton.

• With over 2300 COVID cases currently active in the LGAs of Brimbank and Melton, this is not over yet—we need more people to roll up their sleeves and join us in this fight against the pandemic.

• Our local pharmacies, such as Taylors Lakes Pharmacy, TerryWhite pharmacy and Priceline Pharmacy at Watergardens, have appointments locally.

• I welcome Brimbank City Council’s recent #jabdone campaign launched by mayor Ranka Rasic, which amplifies the importance of getting vaccinated and getting back to the things we love.

• I have always believed that Victoria’s greatest asset is its people, and the collective actions of the community across my electorate continue to prove this as they come forward to receive their jab and get us closer to our statewide targets.

• We all know that being vaccinated remains our best protection against this virus and will help us open up in a safe and cautious way. We all have a significant role to play in reaching our vaccine targets and to help combat the spread of misinformation by referring to our trusted sources and experts.

• But more importantly, we need to do this for our healthcare workers who have worked tirelessly to keep us safe.

Inner Melbourne Community Legal

Ms SANDELL (Melbourne)

In my electorate of Melbourne, the Inner Melbourne Community Legal centre (IMCL) does incredible work supporting disadvantaged members of our community who can’t afford private legal advice.

Too often, it’s the most vulnerable in our community who are disproportionately affected by the legal system, and in many cases contact with the law starts at a young age. That’s why it is crucial that we have organisations like IMCL providing early intervention and support for at-risk young people.

Over the past two years IMCL has been running a school lawyer pilot project to reach marginalised young people. By co-locating a lawyer within schools that already work hard to support at-risk students, this program provides legal education and support and helps prevent, resolve or reduce the severity of civil and criminal matters before they get out of hand.

The schools that IMCL works with include schools in my electorate such as St Joseph’s Flexible Learning Centre and the River Nile School. These schools have students from across the state—including a large number from the outer western and northern suburbs of Melbourne. They support students from culturally diverse and refugee backgrounds; young mothers; students who have had their schooling disrupted or who have been expelled from other schools; people with mental illness, addiction or difficult home lives; and survivors of domestic and family violence. In short, they support students who are unable to get an education through the mainstream schooling system.

The pilot has been really successful, with over 100 services delivered so far, but unfortunately pilot funding from the City of Melbourne has now ended. There is a significant opportunity for the government to continue supporting this important program by funding it into the future, and I call on the state government to do so.

COVID-19 vaccinations

Mr MAAS (Narre Warren South)

I recently had the pleasure of attending pop-up vaccination hubs in my electorate of Narre Warren South at Narre Warren South P–12 College and Arthur Wren Hall in Hampton Park.

It was terrific to catch up with principal, Peter Thatcher, from Narre Warren South P–12 College and Cherith Whittle from Monash Health who collaborated on the temporary hub.

This format was repeated at Arthur Wren Hall in Hampton Park where locals were encouraged to participate and ensure the safety of themselves, their loved ones and community. A special shout-out to Mr Edgar Tan from Eastern Access Community Health who ensured a very smooth operation during the week.

It’s now so important to make sure no-one is left behind and everyone is having the opportunity to get vaccinated via these pop-up hubs. It matters that when we start opening up at 70 per cent and 80 per cent double vaccinated levels, the most vulnerable in our community are protected. Vaccination means you’re far less likely to require hospitalisation and even further lowers your chances of death.

Over 5500 people passed through both hubs, which were convenient for the school community and locals who simply could turn up without an appointment and get vaccinated.

Many have focussed on vaccine hesitancy and crackpot conspiracy theories but it’s clear that the vast majority of Victorians want to be vaccinated, and these pop-up sites help bring jabs closer to constituents’ homes.

I wish to thank all of our healthcare professionals, departmental and council staff, school and community leaders. All have worked so hard to make these pop-up vaccination hubs a success. Their work has directly correlated to a very high first dose vax rate in the Casey LGA and means a safer community too.

COVID-19

Mr BURGESS (Hastings)

Throughout the entirety of this pandemic, small businesses have had to bear the brunt of the constant lockdowns and forced closures of their respective industries. As Victoria looks to reopen again, we must ensure that the road map can provide certainty to these businesses so that they can reopen again and remain open without further impediment.

Retail and hospitality have been forgotten about at every step of the way, and in comparison to NSW, they will have a much longer wait before they can open again. In Labor’s plan for reopening, many retail businesses will be forced to trade outside and through click and collect only—something that is an unviable option for many Victorian businesses. Not only is this affecting retail, but hospitality will also be heavily restricted. Venues with outdoor facilities will be able to open prior to those who do not have such space, but only in an ad hoc manner. These eased restrictions seem to have forgotten the struggling small businesses of Victoria who need to open up now; not to make a profit, but to be able to afford to eat. It’s as if this Labor government doesn’t really understand what a small business is!

While this pandemic is the first ever faced for the majority of the world, and everyone is learning as much as possible as we go, the Andrews government does not seem to have learnt anything at all from its experiences only last year.

Not only does Victoria hold the unenviable title of being the longest locked down location in the world, it was also the only Australian jurisdiction to lose complete control of COVID alpha, which tragically cost 800 Victorians their lives.

It has certainly not been a surprise to those who have had to watch this band of incompetents up close for far too long, that Victoria, despite the Premier’s huff and puff, would eventually lose complete control of COVID delta, and in doing so, set a further unwanted record of daily case numbers.

It has now been months since Premier Andrews announced that, unlike NSW, Victoria would only require a short, sharp lockdown.

We have now been under strict lockdown conditions for far too long, and even the hardiest are now struggling with their mental health.

Yet the Premier and his sidekick heath minister continue to use this whole situation as some kind of macabre joke, where they play guess the numbers of cases, deaths and tests, but apparently neither the Premier or minister have a clue about how many days Victorians have to put up with this sideshow before they will give Victorians back their freedom.

Victoria needs an unequivocal commitment from Premier Andrews that we will follow the national plan, or if he can’t quite bring himself to do that, then at the very least he must provide an alternative clear and concise plan that spells out exactly what will happen and when and if there are any conditions that would bring those measures forward or push them back.

Under the Victorian Liberal-Nationals plan to reopen, recover and rebuild the state of Victoria, once our state reaches the national cabinet’s agreed 70 per cent vaccination rate, retail businesses and hospitality will be able to open with one person per 4 square metres in all indoor spaces and one person per 2 square metres outside. Victorians are begging for their freedom but at this point would settle for at least a little certainty.

COVID-19

Mr BURGESS (Hastings)

In recent weeks, my electorate office has been inundated with calls from my constituents and from constituents of neighbouring Labor electorates seeking help with COVID disaster payments.

These people have been exposed to COVID through various types of interactions, and despite several being very close contacts, the locations of the contact have not been declared as exposure sites.

Declaring a site to be tier 1 or another designation is the responsibility of the Victorian government.

My constituents have done the right thing. As soon as they were informed that they had been in close contact with an infected person, they stopped work, went home and isolated for 14 days. While my constituents did the right thing, the department failed to declare the site as a tier 1. This declaration being the requirement that triggers disaster payments to those isolating.

One of my constituents was told by an operator on the COVID hotline, that because Victoria’s tracking and tracing teams had been so overwhelmed, they were not even getting to the locations that need to be declared as a tier 1 or 2. This is the same contact-tracing team that were using manual contact-tracing methods and a fax machine during Victoria’s deadly second wave last year. It’s clearly not the fault of the people on these teams, they are working as hard as they can; they have been let down badly by an incompetent Andrews government.

In one situation, a constituent of mine had a blood test performed by a person who was identified as being a positive COVID case at the time of the blood test. My constituent was notified about the close contact by the pathology company, so he went home immediately and isolated for two weeks. My constituent understandably expected to be eligible to receive the disaster payment; however, when he applied, the state health department advised him he didn’t qualify because they had been too busy to get to the location on the Mornington Peninsula, and therefore it had not been registered as a tier 1 site! My constituent is now left with a significant financial burden for doing the right thing.

Disaster payments must be made easily available for all those who find themselves in a situation where they are required to isolate and can no longer work. That is the only way we can ensure we can stop the spread and open Victoria again. By tethering these payments to an overwhelmed contact-tracing system, people are being let down.

People should not be forced to miss out on earning their income because of being required to isolate and then be left out of pocket because the Andrews government has left its department under-resourced and overwhelmed.

Ambulance response times

Mr BURGESS (Hastings)

As COVID-19 cases reach their peak in Victoria, we must ensure that our emergency 000 services are equipped with the necessary resources to deal with the expected influx of calls and hospitalisations. This dire situation must be addressed immediately as all elements of our emergency service operations have been stretched to breaking point, despite the state government having had 18 months of warning in which to prepare.

Regrettably, recent reports suggest that there are deadly delays occurring with Victoria’s critically important 000 service. Despite having 18 months of warning and time in which to act, the Andrews government has failed to bolster this vital service to ensure it could do its job when Victorians so badly need it to.

The 000 number is the first point of call for every Victorian in urgent need, so it is essential that it is there and able to take their call for help when needed, regardless of what special circumstances exist elsewhere.

With reports of Victorians being put on hold for as long as 5 minutes and more, it is apparent that there is a critical issue that must be addressed immediately. Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority workers are being overwhelmed by the number of phone calls and are under immense pressure to keep up with a demand that appears to be greater than their workforce.

In an emergency, every second counts. If Victorians are left on hold with 000 during an emergency, the consequences could be dire. Whilst it is tragically too late for some, the Andrews government must bolster this system now, before the on-hold delays cause loss of life for more Victorians.

It is a very straightforward situation. If there are insufficient people or technological resources available to a mission- and time-critical service such as 000 to respond to an emergency, which had been forecast for more than 18 months, then this service is clearly under-resourced.

Where a service as critical as Victoria’s 000 is unable to cope with a predictable surge of need, then it is likely to involve negligence at the very least, and a royal commission should be set up to investigate what went wrong and who was responsible. If we do not get to the bottom of what caused this unacceptable situation, it is likely to be repeated.

COVID-19

Mr BURGESS (Hastings)

As COVID eases in Victoria, we must ensure that the livelihoods of all Victorians are restored as soon and as safely as possible.

The Victorian government’s road map out of lockdown is unnecessarily slow and does not deliver the freedoms Victorians need and deserve soon enough. We as a state already hold the unfortunate record for the world’s longest lockdown, so we cannot afford for this to continue.

Whilst we welcome changes to these draconian lockdown measures, we must ensure we do this in the most efficient way possible. In the current plan, Victorians who have children in school or who work in retail or hospitality are being forgotten. These industries have been ravaged and transformed with restrictions since the beginning of this pandemic, so it is essential that the government provides these industries with a quick and understandable path out.

A Guy government would provide certainty to businesses, parents, and the rest of Victoria by syncing our road map with New South Wales. This would bring greater freedoms, allowing retail and hospitality to return and all kids to be back in the classroom. This would kickstart the Guy government’s plan to revive the City of Melbourne and the state of Victoria, allowing them both to flourish again.

COVID-19

Mr BURGESS (Hastings)

This week, the Andrews government has commenced a trial of a vaccinated economy. As these trials commence, we must ensure that the technology used is accessible for everyone and not only those who are more familiar with smartphones.

This rollout has already experienced the types of major speed bumps that come from the poor planning and preparation the Andrews government has become known for. Poor messaging and an outdated app have caused many of the initial problems, and it is essential that this time the Andrews government gets the planning right and doesn’t leave large parts of our state languishing.

Adding insult to the injuries already caused through this rollout, technology experts are now suggesting that the current Service Victoria app, which is to be used in our vaccinated economy, could easily be forged to misrepresent a person’s vaccination status. In creating a vaccinated economy and then policing it, it is not good enough to have a system so flawed that it can easily be exploited.

With the Andrews government last year trying to fudge its way through tracking and tracing with manual methods and a fax machine and not embracing more advanced technology until this year, it is no surprise that we are on the brink of yet another technological mess that taxpayers will be asked to pay to clean up.

Business Victoria

Mr BURGESS (Hastings)

It is disappointing to hear from constituents that Business Victoria hotline operators are not adequately trained or are unable to answer questions from small business owners about COVID-19 business support regarding grants and programs.

It is even more disappointing when these same operators have told these small business owners to call their local members of Parliament because they cannot assist them with their queries.

The Business Victoria concierge service was established to address these issues.

The Business Victoria website states:

Sole traders and microbusiness owners and operators seeking information or advice about COVID-19 business support can now call our dedicated concierge service for assistance.

Business Victoria was established specifically to help the business community, and this is clearly not happening. The Minister for Small Business needs to intervene to fix this problem.

This is just another example, and we have seen many examples where state government departments have continually failed to deliver for Victorians during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Victorians continue to be let down due to the unpreparedness and mismanagement of the Andrews Labor government, and Victorians deserve better!

Bass Coast Health

Ms CRUGNALE (Bass)

‘Alone, we can do so little; together, we can do so much’.

This is true of the ethos of CEO Jan Child and the entire Bass Coast Health team. We have seen this at every turn of the pandemic journey—the exquisite care, the quality of service, the kindness, the compassion and the humanness shown from the first interaction at the hospital steps, at the town hall vaccination clinic door and at the testing tent in the rain, with a smile right the way through and that metaphorical arm wrapped around us. Non-stop now for nearly two years, they have brought out the best in us all. They are all heart and all community.

The Bass Coast Health team have kept us safe, supported and connected this entire pandemic. They continue to put themselves on the line, and when we get through this time we need to come out to cheer, applaud and throw flowers on the ground they all walk. A big street parade comes to mind!

A special mention to the wonderful and hardworking cleaners, supply and HR staff who all support the clinical teams. As to the entire crew involved with COVID-19 testing and vaccinations, it’s a big operation and our heartfelt thanks to each and every person and their families. The entire BCH team have been magnificent, and we are so grateful.

With the recent $2.5 million complete makeover of Armitage House funded by our Andrews Labor government, with support from our much-loved auxiliaries and local donors, it was due to be handed back to the amazing subacute team. However, for now with an expected surge of COVID cases, it’s a perfect facility to provide back-up support as an additional ED and inpatient ward. It is a safe and spacious facility with a dedicated team.

TS Constructions also need to be vociferously commended. They have shaped the built environment with community, comfort and care at the centre.

Recently awarded the 2021 Master Builders Victoria Regional Commercial Builder of the Year for the new L Rigby cancer centre at the hospital. It was no surprise to see our new-look Armitage House looking modern, spacious and light-filled whilst meeting the highest of clinical standards.

Thank you to their skilled tradespeople and professional workforce in delivering what is sure to be yet another award-winning facility for our community.

We can all be absolutely confident to get the best care in the best facilities here at Bass Coast Health.

COVID-19 vaccinations

Ms SHEED (Shepparton)

I rise today to speak of how proud I am of Greater Shepparton and Moira shires’ residents for their high vaccination rates.

Greater Shepparton has a vaccination rate of 92.8 per cent for single doses and 61 per cent for double doses and Moira shire has reached 95 per cent for single doses and 65.9 per cent for double doses.

While Shepparton has been the most locked down regional electorate, we are certainly making sure we protect ourselves, our families, and our community by getting vaccinated.

Moira shire even challenged its neighbouring local government area of Indigo and the two New South Wales shires of Berrigan and Federation in a vaccination competition to see which local government area could reach an 80 per cent double vaccination rate the quickest. It is refreshing to see such challenges embraced by the community because we all want to feel safer when we start to enjoy again some of the freedoms that we have given up in 2020 and 2021.

I was heartened by the support our community members offered one another in our last two lockdowns, especially when we had several outbreaks at schools and a large percentage of the community in isolation.

The community spirit shone through yet again, with volunteers dropping off food and medicine packages to isolating families.

We hope our high vaccination rates will mean we no longer have to face serious restrictions in the future, will see Shepparton district reintroduced into the border bubble and within a very short time all border restrictions lifted as we learn to live with COVID-19.

Darcy’s environment project

Ms WARD (Eltham)

Last week I met with a talented Grade 3 student, Darcy, from Eltham Primary. As an environment project for school, Darcy had decided to include our community in his work. Darcy put out the call for people in our area to pick up any rubbish they saw lying around as they went on their walks and picnics. He was particularly keen for people to take away rubbish found near our precious Diamond Creek, which is home to important wildlife such as the platypus.

As people in this place will know, we have many beautiful walking trails in my electorate and keeping them clean, particularly around the Diamond Creek and the Yarra River, is incredibly important. Removing rubbish in order to help protect our environment is vital, and I congratulate Darcy on his initiative.

Darcy and his family managed to collect over 7 kilograms of rubbish on their walk, primarily from around the Diamond Creek in Eltham.

I thank Darcy—and his supportive family—for the great work he has done (and will continue to do, for he is not done yet) and for including our community in his idea to help keep our Diamond Creek clean.

Congratulations, Darcy—terrific work!

Bushfire preparedness

Ms WARD (Eltham)

As we head towards this summer’s fire season, I thank in advance our local fire services and the Nillumbik SES for the work I know they will undertake over the next few months. While I hope they all have a quiet fire season, we know that fire can be unpredictable, and we need to be as ready and prepared as possible.

We are extremely lucky in our community to have so many wonderful volunteers, who drop everything time and time again to help those who need it, often in dangerous situations.

If you would like to volunteer for the CFA or for the SES, please keep an eye out for my fire season information card, coming your way soon!

I encourage all in our area to turn their minds to being ready for fire season, to check their fire plans, to tidy up around their homes, and be ready for the season ahead. Do it to protect yourself and your loved ones, but also do it for our first responders to help them with their work over the summer.

Small business support

Mr NEWBURY (Brighton)

Labor’s attitude towards small business throughout the pandemic has been shameful. This week the government admitted their disinterest in supporting the 660 000 Victorian small businesses. At anti-corruption hearings this week a government witness admitted: ‘The small business portfolio was so small, there wasn’t a lot of work to do’.

The reality is that Labor’s effort towards small business has been insulting. On average five out of six small businesses have been ineligible for the government’s own designed support.

We also know that in the latest round of the business costs assistance program support has been cut from $2800 to $1000.

Numerous businesses have also reported significant delays in October’s automatic payments. One business said to me today: ‘Business support entails two fortnightly payments of $5600 from 1 October to 26 October and the first payment has not even been processed’ and that ‘This ALP Victorian government swiftly locks us down and they should equally as swiftly process payments … this dictatorship government is pathetic and completely reactive!’.

Labor is showing utter contempt towards hundreds of thousands of Victorian small businesses, their families and their staff.

Gardenvale Primary School

Mr NEWBURY (Brighton)

Gardenvale Primary School, in Brighton East, is an outstanding school that has been teaching our local children since 1922. Gardenvale Primary is a split-school learning environment with a junior campus and senior campus and a growing enrolment of almost 630 students. We are all looking forward to celebrating the school’s century of service to our community.

The department of education recently visited the school and deemed a senior school external fire escape staircase non-compliant. Yet, concerningly, the government has placed the burden of the $200 000 repairs onto the school.

As the school has advised the minister, this burden is unfair because, in the school’s words:

a) facility maintenance is the department’s responsibility, not the community’s;

b) the issue of OH&S is not a discretionary matter—the works need to be done as the only other viable staircase is even older and is extremely slippery when wet;

c) almost the entirety of our school’s funds (outside of the department mandated reserve) have already been committed—and there is not sufficient financial capacity;

d) it is the department’s specific direction that funds raised from families are to be directed to student consumables and not facilities such as this expenditure.

Over recent years the school community has invested $1.27 million into school works. Though an incredible testament to the community’s hard work, it is unfair that the parent body has contributed two-thirds of recent capital investment.

Sadly, Labor’s only investment came after significant community advocacy called for upgrades to basic needs, like bathroom updates. The school community has described government funding as ‘yet to commence and has been severely slowed by lockdown and general bureaucracy’.

Labor needs to do the right thing by Gardenvale Primary School and the Brighton East community. We are talking about support to fix a fire escape staircase. Government funding should be based on need, not on politics, and it must fund basic school safety needs. I call on the minister to stop Labor’s partisan approach to school funding and help Gardenvale Primary.

Sandy all-abilities program

Mr NEWBURY (Brighton)

Bayside-based netball association Sandringham and District Netball Association delivers an award-winning program and inspires young people of all abilities.

The association founded the Sandy all-abilities program in 2018. The program is led by Emily Higgins and Kris Pierce, two community advocates who have shown leadership in so many facets of bayside life.

As the two said on founding the program: ‘We wanted it to be accessible and inclusive of everyone so that we could set the foundations for a strong program culture from the beginning’.

Week in, week out, young girls donate their time to coach the program. As Emily described: ‘These girls just “got” the program from the beginning. They coach these kids just like they would coach everyone else. They teach them the fundamentals of skill development, positioning, teamwork and provide a level playing field for all netballers of all abilities’.

There is now a junior and senior all-abilities offering. And to add to their inclusive program, the team have also created an eight-part free video resource through the Netfit app—an app founded by Sarah Wall.

My warmest congratulations to Emily, Kris and Sarah on the incredible leadership they have shown with the all-abilities program.

COVID-19 vaccinations

Mr SCOTT (Preston)

Today I would like to acknowledge the fantastic work of the Islamic Museum of Australia and Your Community Health in vaccinating the community in the northern suburbs of Melbourne.

Recently a vaccination centre was operated at the Islamic Museum of Victoria. Over 1100 Victorians were vaccinated.

The majority vaccinated were members of Melbourne’s Muslim community, a community that has been hit hard during the pandemic, especially the most recent wave.

The vaccination centre was also open to the wider community.

I was lucky enough to visit the centre and meet the workers providing this vital service. Many of the workers were from the very community that they were protecting.

This has been a wonderful collaboration between community health and the Islamic museum, where expertise in primary health has been combined with the network into the community that the good work of the Islamic museum has built over years.

I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to Mr Moustafa Fahour, founder and director of the museum, for his tireless work.

Gambling harm Awareness Week

Ms SETTLE (Buninyong)

• Next week is Gambling Harm Awareness Week.

• This is a time to encourage people to talk about the harms associated with gambling and the effects they can have on communities, families, friends, workplaces and individuals.

• Talk, share and support.

• Gambling harm can affect self-esteem, relationships, physical and mental health, work performance and social life.

• The stigma around gambling can lead to lower self-esteem and feelings of shame or failure and can lead to a delay in acknowledging gambling difficulties and seeking help.

• This year Gambling Harm Awareness Week highlights neuroscientific research to explain how the brain changes and responds to gambling and how an addiction can develop.

• Brain scans show how a near miss can be almost as exciting as a win, and this affects a person’s ability to stop gambling.

• When people experiencing gambling harm learn about the underlying reasons for their gambling, it can help reduce stigma and build their confidence to seek help.

• I have been a strong advocate for the services in our community to help people.

• This includes local services such as CAFS and Ballarat Community Health who work tirelessly to support people.

• The All-in project run by Ballarat Health Services encouraged people to take a break and try new things: hit the gym, try gardening or reading a book—there are many ways to stay connected in our community.

• And CAFS has a highly experienced team to deliver personalised counselling and practical support to anyone who has an issue with gambling.

• The Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation supports a range of similar community-led projects across our state and awareness campaigns.

• The ‘love the game, not the odds’ initiative encourages sporting clubs throughout Victoria to take a stand against sports betting sponsorship, helping juniors to ‘love the game, not the odds’.

• More than 500 local and elite sporting clubs are ‘love the game, not the odds’ partners.

• Locally this includes AFL Goldfields, Bacchus Marsh Soccer Club, Ballarat City Football Club, Ballarat Football Netball League, Ballarat Women’s Cricket Club, Bannockburn Football and Netball Club and the Western Bulldogs, which means they say no to sports betting sponsorship.

• Sport and gambling don’t have to go together, and I commend all 500-plus participants for taking a stand to protect the wellbeing of young people.

Chisholm TAFE, Frankston campus

Mr EDBROOKE (Frankston)

Following the completion of the $85 million Frankston campus stage 1 development in 2019, the Frankston campus redevelopment project stage 2 (FRP2) is a $67.6 million investment on behalf of the Victorian state government and the Victorian Department of Education and Training (DET) due for completion in mid-2023.

The flagship TAFE campus in Frankston catering for over 3000 students is an incredibly exciting opportunity which will benefit many industry and community stakeholders of Frankston and the surrounding areas for decades to come.

FRP2, when realised, will position the Frankston campus as one of Victoria’s and quite possibly Australia’s flagship TAFE campuses. The scope for the design of the facility is complex when needing to maximise space utilisation for a large cohort of 3000-plus students. The design aligns to futureproofing the learning environment by incorporating innovative open-planned, flexible, digital-enabled learning spaces, creating a modern, safe and fit-for-purpose education environment aligned to current environment building requirements.

The project is expected to provide a total economic benefit of over $200 million to the south-east of Melbourne with over 150 new jobs forecasted (including 25 apprentices). The new development will encompass over 9000 metres square of state-of-the-art, high-functioning and flexible learning spaces, creating a learning environment fit for purpose and aligned to the social needs of students.

During the planning phase extensive investigation was undertaken to assess buildings C and E’s condition, the presence of hazardous material, and heritage status. Both buildings have been assessed as no longer fit for purpose and do not support the institute’s approach to flexibility, pedagogy or accessibility. Significant work is required to achieve current building standards and remove and remediate the presence of hazardous material, severely impacting the budget, functionality, program and overall aesthetics of the facility. Following an assessment in 2010 by Bryce Raworth on behalf of the Frankston City Council, building C was not granted heritage status. The Raworth report noted, ‘The former Frankston High School is not of sufficient heritage significance to warrant protection under the City of Frankston planning scheme’. A further heritage review was undertaken by council in 2019. Building C was not included in this review.

That’s not to say there is no historical value and emotional significance for locals. In recognition of this history Chisholm Institute and the project team have taken steps to commemorate building C. These initiatives include:

– recovery, restoration and incorporation of the foundation stone in the landscape design;

– a commemorative art piece has been commissioned with our art and design school to be on display in the new gallery space; photos and video footage of building C have been collected and will be made available to local community and historical groups;

– an online archive of photos, stories and memories from previous staff and students will be established;

– meeting and collaboration spaces will be named in recognition of previous staff and students who have had a significant impact on the local community. Community engagement will be an ongoing feature of the project at the completion of the first design phase.

Several online community forums were held where members of the Frankston community were invited to provide their feedback on the project.

These forums were advertised via both local and social media, Frankston City Council and via direct invitation. The feedback received during these sessions was overwhelmingly positive and supported by council and members of the community.

I look forward to the commencement of this exciting project that puts Frankston on the national stage for the right reasons once again!

Oakleigh electorate level crossing removals

Mr DIMOPOULOS (Oakleigh)

It was back in February 2018 that the level crossing at Koornang Road, Carnegie, was removed—one of four already removed in my electorate alone and one of 47 that have been removed by the Andrews Labor government since we were elected.

Not only did we remove a dangerous and congested level crossing, we also opened up 22.5 hectares of community space. And from that we have created bike and walking paths, play equipment, fitness stations—even a table tennis table and basketball court. It has been an extraordinary investment in community space.

But we’re not done.

Works are going on right now to deliver new and improved recreation space at Girdwood Avenue and Woorayl Street Reserve in Carnegie.

We’re also delivering 27 additional trader car spaces on Egan Street, Carnegie.

It is just another benefit to come from removing this level crossing, and it delivers on an important commitment to my community to create more community space.

Lynne Foster

Mr DIMOPOULOS (Oakleigh)

I would like place on record my sincere condolences at the passing of former Murrumbeena Primary School principal Lynne Foster.

Lynne worked at a number of local schools, including Clayton South Primary School and Hughesdale Primary School, before being appointed as the principal of Murrumbeena Primary in 2017.

She was incredibly active and involved in the wider Murrumbeena Primary School community and was an extraordinarily passionate advocate for her school.

I want to extend my thoughts and sympathies to Lynne’s family and friends and the broader Murrumbeena Primary school community. I know that Lynne will be missed dearly.

South Barwon electorate healthcare workers

Mr CHEESEMAN (South Barwon)

I would like to personally thank the hardworking healthcare workers of the Geelong region that have taken us through a year and a half of this global pandemic. I’d like to thank the nurses, doctors and other health staff at Barwon Health at the testing sites, at Geelong hospital, at Epworth private and at the Ford vaccination hub for everything they have done for us. I’d like to thank all the pharmacists and the many allied health workers that make the healthcare industry work. Our health workers have worked long hours in extensive PPE to test us for COVID, to get us vaccinated and to provide the best possible health care to us in difficult circumstances.

I am glad that this government has announced additional allowance payments to go to our healthcare heroes in proper recognition of the difficult 18 months they have had. I know that the many healthcare workers in my electorate will appreciate this, but no amount of money can ever communicate the depth of our gratitude for the sacrifices they have made.

Thank you for the fantastic job that you all do. Together you have carried us through this pandemic, and we will continue to support you in any way that we can.

Thomastown electorate internet access

Ms HALFPENNY (Thomastown)

I have been working with residents of the Aurora estate in the northern part of the Thomastown electorate to improve the abysmal internet connections within this estate and support families required to work and study at home. The minister for the digital economy has been working really hard on this and numerous correspondence has been sent to the federal minister responsible. This has sadly fallen on deaf ears.

At a state level we have provided dongles to students to allow them to access internet services and advocated and lobbied for solutions to this ongoing problem that is creating so much frustration to residents.

Minister Pulford organised a round table on the issue on 17 September this year, and I thank resident Tahirih Twyford and Aurora Community Association representative Tony Francis for attending and putting the concerns and suggestions of residents. Ged Kunkel from my office did a great job supporting and working with residents at the round table as I was unable to attend.

The COVID pandemic has devastated our society, and digital connectedness has become that so much more important.

I look forward to our further meeting tomorrow, again arranged by Minister Pulford, with residents and NBN representatives, because our Andrew Labor government wants solutions to this problem and backs residents 100 per cent.

Constituency questions

Following questions incorporated in accordance with resolution of house of 7 October:

Croydon electorate

Mr HODGETT (Croydon) (6076)

My constituency question is to the Minister for Health, regarding the government’s metro road map for places of worship and numbers of unknown-vaccination parishioners.

Will the minister please clarify the information in the government’s road map in relation to the number of people who can attend a worship service?

I have been contacted by a couple of local churches who are asking for clarification of the road map, specifically when Victoria reaches our 80 per cent double vaccinated.

The road map states ‘Fully vaccinated: indoors DQ4 (Density Quotients) and 150 capacity, outdoors DQ2 500 capacity’, then goes on to say ‘Unknown vaccination status: 20 cap DQ4’.

Is this unknown vaccination status 20 cap DQ4 indoors or outdoors, and are these included in the 150 cap or 500 cap, or for vaccination-unknown parishioners you can only have a maximum of 20 indoors or outdoors?

My constituents have contacted the COVID hotline and other government departments and have read media articles, but there seems to be some confusion in the interpretation of the road map.

These wonderful local churches want to open their doors and comply with all the public health orders, they have their COVID plans, social distancing and QR ready to go.

Places of worship are more important than ever for spiritual needs, emotional and mental wellbeing. They allow for prayer, fellowship and encouragement of one another, especially in times of crisis.

Narre Warren South electorate

Mr MAAS (Narre Warren South) (6077)

My question is for the Minister for Education and concerns the mental health practitioners in secondary schools initiative. Minister, how will the rollout of mental health practitioners in every government secondary school support the students in my electorate of Narre Warren South?

Mental health has been an issue for so many in our community, and the Andrews Labor government has been at the forefront of understanding the issues through the establishment of the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System.

The global pandemic has thrown a spotlight on mental health, especially in regard to education through remote learning and the impact on our youngest students. Any support and assistance to help students cope, build resilience and improve their wellbeing would be beneficial during the pandemic and beyond.

I would appreciate it if the minister could provide further information on how the mental health practitioners in secondary schools initiative will support students in my electorate. I look forward to sharing the minister’s response with my community.

Gippsland East electorate

Mr T BULL (Gippsland East) (6078)

My constituency question is to the Minister for Small Business, and the information I seek is: when will the government provide more information on its mandatory vaccination requirements to the business sector?

On Friday, 1 October, the Premier announced vaccination mandates will be introduced for authorised workers and industries noted on the Victorian state government’s authorised premises and worker list.

However, they have not offered any clear guidance, instruction, training or education for business owners so that they can understand their legal obligations surrounding the COVID-19 Mandatory Vaccination (Workers) Directions.

Countless employers and employees have contacted my electorate office seeking guidance, so I ask when you will provide the information they seek.

Carrum electorate

Ms KILKENNY (Carrum) (6079)

My constituency question is for the Treasurer.

Treasurer, what is the Andrews Labor government doing to help people in my electorate of Carrum to buy their own home?

I was recently contacted by a resident in Seaford who wanted to know what help and assistance was available to help her get back into the housing market after fleeing from family violence. She wants to rebuild her life after experiencing trauma and to start again with a secure, safe place of her own.

I know there are others who are equally keen to hear what support is available to help them break into the property market and realise their dream of owning their own home.

Ferntree Gully electorate

Mr WAKELING (Ferntree Gully) (6080)

My question is for the Minister for Education. I have been contacted by a primary school in my electorate in relation to the government’s rollout of air purifiers in Victorian schools.

With the government having committed to the rollout of air purifiers at the start of term 4, this primary school has queried why it has received no information from the Department of Education and Training about this program.

With some staff and students back in the classroom and with more students due to return imminently, this school, like all schools in my electorate, is committed to ensuring classrooms and other higher risk areas are as COVID safe as possible.

Minister, on behalf of all schools in my electorate, can you advise when and by what means these schools can or will obtain air purifiers?

Northcote electorate

Ms THEOPHANOUS (Northcote) (6081)

My question is to the Minister for Roads and Road Safety.

I ask the minister: what opportunities will be available for my community to provide further input and feedback on the Farm Road link to the Darebin Yarra Trail as this crucial project gets underway?

Building a direct, safe and accessible link for residents of Alphington to get onto the Darebin Yarra Trail has long been called for by locals in the area.

As the minister knows, currently residents are cut off from accessing this spectacular walking and cycling track which skirts their neighbourhood. Locals have to travel either north to enter through Ivanhoe or south via Kew East.

That is why over the last two years I’ve been working closely alongside local residents, stakeholders, VicRoads and the minister’s office to progress this project.

Throughout it has been my strong view that the voice of the community has a central role to play in contributing to the design and planning of this project.

In 2018 VicRoads undertook a range of community engagements to inform the development of plans and route options—and we set up a stakeholder reference group to assess them.

This early work was pivotal to determining that the safest, most accessible, functional and environmentally friendly route is a footbridge over Latrobe Golf Club from Farm Road.

Building the footbridge here has not been a straightforward task, but a few months ago I was able to share some exciting news with my community—with the minister’s assistance, we passed some vital legislation in the Victorian Parliament and secured the funding we need to get this project done.

After a long wait the link is funded, it is happening, and gosh we look forward to it.

As we get on with designing and building this crucial piece of local infrastructure, community feedback will continue to be vital in getting the best outcomes.

Recently I met with residents of Farm Road who offered some very valuable insights and on-the-ground knowledge of the area, how their roads are used and how to incorporate additional safety features into the future design.

As VicRoads is progressing its work to deliver this remarkable project, I’m looking forward to sharing information with my community about their future opportunities to hear more details, consider the design and convey local feedback directly to the project team.

Finally, I again thank the residents and community groups who have advocated for this link over the years and worked proactively alongside me to progress it. When it’s finished, I know it will be a wonderful asset to our suburbs.

Brunswick electorate

Dr READ (Brunswick) (6082)

My constituents with a disability and with mobility issues such as elderly constituents are asking when they will be able to use the trams that run on Sydney Road.

This requires installing accessible platform stops so that all people, including those with prams, wheelchairs or difficulty with steps, can safely and easily get on and off trams.

I also note that car traffic is slowly building up towards prepandemic levels on Sydney Road and that the government is still to take action to make the road safer for bike riders by installing separated bike lanes.

So my constituency question to the minister is: when will we see an upgrade to Sydney Road, consistent with the proposal chosen by the majority of the community in the VicRoads survey, that includes accessible platform tram stops and separated bike lanes?

Box Hill electorate

Mr HAMER (Box Hill) (6083)

My constituency question is to the Minister for Health.

Minister, how has the recently opened mass testing site at Deakin University in Burwood increased access to testing and reduced wait times at other sites in the eastern suburbs?

We know that throughout the pandemic governments and public health authorities worldwide have learned the importance of widespread testing.

If we find cases early, we can stop chains of transmission and protect our community and healthcare system.

Everyone in Victoria, regardless of their location or citizenship, can access a free PCR test quickly.

But we also know it is critical to make testing as accessible as possible, which is why I was very pleased to see the Andrews government recently open a major new testing site at Deakin University, Burwood.

This new drive-through site provides the constituents of Box Hill and surrounding districts with testing options which are closer to home and more convenient.

It’s great news for my local community and another positive addition to our COVID-19 response, which will take pressure off other local testing sites.

Hastings electorate

Mr BURGESS (Hastings) (6084)

My question is to the Minister for Health on behalf of my constituents, and I ask: when will the Andrews Labor government upgrade its Department of Health coronavirus website and respond to what appears to be a rapidly expanding number of COVID-19 cases on the Mornington Peninsula?

Constituents have contacted my office regarding a lack of updated information on the department’s website about the increasing spread of the COVID-19 cases on the Mornington Peninsula.

A person confirmed as being positive for COVID-19 visited the Somerville Woolworths store over a 3-hour period. Several of my constituents were in the store during that time and had scanned in via the Service Victoria app QR code. None of these people were notified by the department and the store was never registered as a tier 1 site.

Another recent example saw a number of my constituents desperately seeking information and guidance following a confirmed visit of a COVID-positive person to their children’s school, while the children were present. While the school was contacted, none of the families were, despite reported interactions having occurred between school staff members and the COVID-positive person.

There is also a situation where families whose children attend a local childcare centre are still waiting to receive information and guidance from DH following five confirmed COVID-19 cases connected to the centre.

In another situation, one of my constituents had a blood test taken by a person who was later confirmed as being COVID positive at that time. My constituent was notified by the pathology company and therefore isolated at home for two weeks. However, as DH was too busy and didn’t get to the site, it was not declared as a tier 1 and my constituent has now been refused disaster payments because it was not a tier 1 site.

My constituent is now left with a financial burden for doing the right thing.

Last week the federal health minister, Greg Hunt, said on Melbourne radio that he would be contacting the Victorian government to ask for clarification about COVID-19 spread on the Mornington Peninsula after a local doctor said that positive cases in the region are growing but the community isn’t being told about potential exposure.

Mr Hunt said that he would be writing to the Victorian government to ask them to ensure there is full public reporting so people are given all the details, are able to take all the precautions and are able to protect themselves.

These cases highlight that this situation has not yet been rectified, and I ask the minister for his urgent assistance in addressing this situation.

Lara electorate

Mr EREN (Lara) (6085)

My question is to the Minister for Health, and I ask the minister: what work is being done to increase vaccination rates in high-priority postcodes, including in the 3214 postcode, and the suburbs of Corio and Norlane?

The electorate I represent, the Lara electorate, is home to a wonderful community of people, but unfortunately it is also home to serious disadvantage.

Suburbs such as Corio and Norlane have some of the highest levels of disadvantage across the state.

Data is also showing us that just 40 to 45 per cent of people in these suburbs that are eligible for vaccination were fully vaccinated.

And only 75 to 80 per cent have had their first dose of vaccination.

This is unfortunately below the statewide average and also below the Geelong average, which for first dose is sitting at 93 per cent.

I would like to thank all those people who have gone out and gotten vaccinated or made an appointment to be vaccinated—you are saving lives.

As a local member, I am working hard to hold online community vaccination information sessions.

These sessions will continue, but additional resources will go a long way to continuing to break down barriers for this community to access vital vaccinations.

So again, my question to the Minister for Health is: Minister, what work is being done to increase vaccination rates in high-priority postcodes, including in the 3214 postcode, and the suburbs of Corio and Norlane?

Adjournment

Following matters incorporated in accordance with resolution of house of 7 October:

Emergency services workers

Mr BATTIN (Gembrook) (6087)

My adjournment is for the Minister for Emergency Services.

The action I seek is that the minister meet with SES volunteers to discuss the impact of COVD-19 on their duties and the potential outcomes in the event of an emergency.

Minister, in Victoria we are exceptionally lucky to have so many volunteers across many organisations who assist their communities and other communities in their time of need. Today I am asking about the SES volunteers who have contacted me and raised some genuine concerns.

In Victoria we have seen the impact of COVID and understand the need for vaccination. The government have put out mandates for vaccinations, and this will result in some people remaining unable to work if their role requires attending a workplace in person. Volunteers will be treated no differently, as they will also not be able to attend for training or emergencies unless they have the double vaccinations.

However, a person who can work from home as an unvaccinated person still can, but volunteers are told by the SES they cannot. If they are not vaccinated, they cannot assist the unit in administration duties or other areas that will free up the time of the unit manager or leadership team.

In the past few weeks we have seen further attacks on volunteers in Victoria with the offensive adverts saying people living within CFA response zones are not covered by professional firefighters—and you have remained silent on this. Then SES volunteers were concerned when the United Firefighters Union management called for their members to be primary responders for road accidents without any consultation with SES volunteers, and you remained silent. Now SES volunteers will be treated differently to any other government sector employee who, if they can work from home, will keep their job—but volunteers will not be able to assist in the work they love. This makes no sense, and I trust you will not remain silent on this.

On behalf of the volunteers in my area and across the state, we need clarification and we need all our volunteers supported. So, I invite you to join me on a Zoom or in-person meeting with a representation of volunteers in the SES to ensure they can keep protecting Victoria and giving back to their communities.

Creative industries sector

Ms KILKENNY (Carrum) (6088)

My adjournment matter is for the Minister for Creative Industries.

And the action I seek is for the minister to provide an update for creative sector workers and organisations in my electorate on what the recently announced $15 million funding package means for them.

Workers, small businesses and microbusinesses in the creative sector have been some of the most affected and hardest hit during the pandemic. These people are vital in helping us maintain Melbourne and Victoria as the creative capital of Australia. We are renowned for our arts, festivals, live shows, exhibitions and performances.

And whilst our creative industry sector has shown incredible resilience over the last 18 months, with many still working hard during the pandemic to keep us engaged, inspired and entertained over virtual platforms and stages, they have faced enormous challenges with venue closures, cancellations and lost work.

But now as we move closer and closer to opening up, it is truly exciting to know we can soon be entertained again at all the venues we know and love.

I look forward to receiving the minister’s update on support for Victoria’s creative industry, including those in my electorate.

Rob and Michelle Lewis

Mr McCURDY (Ovens Valley) (6089)

My adjournment is to the Minister for Planning, and the action that I seek is for the minister to please, please, please contact Rob and Michelle Lewis of Bright and show them how to navigate their way through titles issues. We have been knocked back by many ministers for support when no department will really try to understand their situation.

It is a minor dilemma for the government but a massive dilemma for the Lewis family. They are simply not ready for another fob-off.

The Lewis family hold property in Toorak Road, Bright. The Lewis family have a piece of Crown land that is adjacent to them and require a ruling before they can purchase or take control to complete their subdivision and finalise a process that has been going on for many, many years. Having a response from the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change and her department, who say this is a complex area of native title assessment, and the titles office, are just two pieces of this puzzle. A response from the Premier is just as frustrating.

After a very tough couple of years, through bushfires and COVID, the Lewis family need an outcome, and I seek your assistance and intervention in this matter. Adjoining properties solved the exact same problem a few years earlier; the previous owner chose not to solve the issue then, but we cannot get any departmental person to talk to us except those who will write a dear John letter This has become quite urgent and I seek urgent intervention.

Gaffney–Sussex streets, Coburg North

Ms BLANDTHORN (Pascoe Vale) (6090)

I appreciate the opportunity to raise a matter for the attention of the Minister for Roads and Road Safety.

The action I seek is that the minister officially open the new Sussex and Gaffney streets intersection in Coburg North when works to remove the roundabout and fully signalise the intersection are complete.

The community has been watching eagerly as work has been progressing on this project. They have also been extremely patient—moving around the area carefully and adapting to detours during road closures.

Last weekend this project reopened to traffic after stage 1 works. These works involved removing what was the existing roundabout, trenching for new traffic signals and street lighting, the laying of a base pavement and putting in place a temporary roundabout made from recycled rubber. New pavement, footpaths and drainage are also now in place.

Stage 2 work will include the completion of kerbing and road resurfacing, the relocation of power poles, the connection of new street lighting, traffic signals, permanent line marking and building new bus stops. Most significantly, stage 2 includes the final removal of the roundabout and installation of the much-anticipated traffic lights.

I would appreciate the opportunity to host the minister on site so he can see firsthand the massive transformation of this intersection—improving road safety and efficiency in the area for decades to come.

School camps

Ms VALLENCE (Evelyn) (6091)

On behalf of all school camps that operate across Victoria, and in my electorate, the matter I raise is for the Minister for Education. The action I seek is for the minister and the Andrews Labor government to commit to allowing school camps to reopen on 5 November 2021, on the same day that all students will be back in school in accordance with Victoria’s road map, when the 80 per cent double vaccination for COVID-19 has been met, and permit schools and their students to return to school camps during term 4 in 2021, before the end of the year.

Currently school camps are not included anywhere in Victoria’s road map, and the education department has been completely silent on when school camps can recommence their operations.

There have been very concerning reports published in the media that the Labor government are planning to ban any school camps taking place for the remainder of the 2021 school year, with no certainty as to when school camps will be allowed to open in 2022. As part of the action I seek, can the minister rule out a ban on school camps for the remainder of the 2021 school year?

If it’s safe for all children in all year levels to return to school full-time, then there is no reason why our kids in smaller year-level groups can’t return to enjoying our amazing school camps. I have been contacted by a number of school camp operators—small family businesses—who take their duty of care extremely seriously and have told me they have their COVID-safe plans in place, they undertake regular cleaning, all staff have received COVID-19 vaccinations and most of their activities take place outside in the fresh air, as opposed to a classroom.

If our public health authorities advise it’s safe to allow 10 000 people to attend a horserace, then surely 100 children can attend a school camp.

Our children have suffered the longest lockdown in the world and have lost more than 170 days of face-to-face learning as a result of the harsh lockdowns, severely disrupting their education and social development. Our children and young teenagers have been starved of social interaction and participation in exciting and challenging outdoor activities. School camps play a significant role in the education of our children, providing them physical exercise, team-building and problem-solving skills, social development, and improving their mental health and wellbeing.

Minister, one of these school camp operators in the Yarra Valley recently told me she and her family were broken. They have suffered a more than $1.5 million loss in revenue and see no hope for the future of their business that they have successfully run for 18 years. With the failure to mention school camp businesses as part of the government’s road map and no certainty regarding school camps for the remainder of term 4, 2021, they are facing more than two years of being forced shut by government-imposed restrictions without commensurate financial support. The risk for these family businesses, for the department of education and for hundreds of thousands of Victorian school students is that these important school camp businesses will fold and be lost forever. Surely, Minister, you do not want that legacy.

Minister, I seek your urgent action to provide certainty to the school camps industry and allow them to reopen and host students from 5 November 2021.

South Barwon electorate infrastructure

Mr CHEESEMAN (South Barwon) (6092)

The Andrews Labor government has always been a government that delivers, particularly when undertaking the big, bold projects needed for our growing communities. Projects like the level crossing removal program, the Metro Tunnel, the Barwon Heads Road duplication and the Geelong line upgrade are fantastic investments in our state’s future.

These projects are creating thousands of jobs across our state and delivering direct benefit for our local communities in regional Victoria. The Geelong region is growing rapidly, and these investments are much needed to cater for and provide for the new residents of our community.

Construction has begun on the Barwon Heads Road duplication project, which will add new lanes for approximately 4 kilometres between Settlement Road and Reserve Road, remove a dangerous level crossing at Marshall and upgrade intersections at Settlement Road and Breakwater Road. These are improvements to the daily commute that my constituents are much looking forward to.

Projects like this are vital to our local economic recovery—it’s not only delivering an important project but creates much-needed local jobs and gets shovels in the ground as quickly as possible.

Construction has also begun on the Waurn Ponds stabling yard, which will be an important part of our Geelong line upgrade project. Facilities here will support the increased services when the Geelong line is fully upgraded and allow more frequent and reliable train services.

These projects are one piece in a broader infrastructure plan that includes the Geelong fast rail project, which the Victorian government has pledged $2 billion towards.

Alongside delivering the modern regional rail services a growing Victoria needs, Geelong fast rail will be a significant driver of jobs for the region—with stage 1 set to deliver more than 2800 local jobs when construction begins in 2023.

Geelong fast rail builds on more than $1 billion of works already underway to improve the Geelong rail corridor—including the upgrade of the Waurn Ponds station and the South Geelong to Waurn Ponds duplication—which will duplicate a key section of track to deliver more frequent and reliable services for passengers.

The Waurn Ponds station upgrade project is continuing at a fantastic pace, and I will be glad to see the new and improved station when it is finished. I was proud to announce this project as a candidate in the 2018 election, and I am very glad to be delivering it now that I am in government.

The action I am seeking is for the Minister for Transport Infrastructure, when it is COVID safe and allowed under the restrictions, to come to South Barwon and inspect with me the progress on the Waurn Ponds station upgrade. This is an important project that is part of the broader South Geelong–Waurn Ponds rail duplication and will deliver significant benefits to my electorate.

Big Housing Build

Ms ADDISON (Wendouree) (6093)

My adjournment matter is for the Minister for Housing, and the action that I seek is that the minister provide me with an update about further opportunities for investment and job creation in my electorate of Wendouree as we deliver the $5.3 billion Big Housing Build.

I thank the minister for his strong and compassionate leadership and once again congratulate him on Victoria’s largest ever investment in social and affordable housing.

The Victorian government Big Housing Build is building thousands of new homes for Victorians in need and creating tens of thousands of new jobs to support Victoria’s post-COVID recovery.

I am so proud that the Andrews Labor government is investing over $20 million in Ballarat, delivering 89 new social housing homes across nine projects, creating more than 250 local jobs in my community.

This investment includes funding for 25 homes in two Delacombe locations to be delivered in partnership with Centacare Housing Services. These properties will provide long-term housing to support people on the Victorian Housing Register.

Other projects in Ballarat include 16 homes in Redan delivered in partnership with the Haven Foundation; four homes in Brown Hill delivered in partnership with Aboriginal Housing Victoria; 18 homes in Canadian delivered in partnership with Community Housing (Vic) Ltd; 14 homes in Canadian delivered in partnership with Haven; Home, Safe; and 12 homes in Mount Pleasant delivered in partnership with Haven; Home, Safe.

Our $20 million investment into social housing across Ballarat provides desperately needed housing for our most vulnerable community members. As well as transforming lives, this investment will stimulate the local economy and create jobs. This is a great outcome for my community.

These nine projects are included in the 44 projects announced for regional Victoria worth $202.6 million, creating 583 social housing homes.

This investment is in addition to the $50 million the state government has already announced for the Delacombe housing estate revitalisation, which will construct at least 150 social housing homes, including the replacement of 66 of the existing ageing social housing homes with 7-star energy-efficient homes.

I look forward to receiving the update from the Minister for Housing and the Victorian government continuing to invest in social and affordable housing in Ballarat.

COVID-19

Mr TILLEY (Benambra) (6094)

I wish to raise a matter for the Minister for Education, and the action I seek is for the immediate release of the health advice that has forced our kids to suffer through this piecemeal return to the classroom.

As we stand here today some year 11 students are in the classrooms in regional Victoria, years 5, 6 and 10 will be there today and tomorrow. Year 7s returned on Monday. Other years got a taste of face-to-face learning earlier this week but are now back at home.

The question we ask is: why?

Those of us on this side of the house have continued to call out the damage that this is causing to education, social interaction and mental health. Those on the other side have ignored our pleas.

So, today I’m letting Molly Howard ask the question.

She is a year 10 student in Wodonga who wrote to me last week:

I just have a few questions based on some of the regional Victoria rules.

This school holidays it was great to finally be able to go somewhere other than my own town and know I was able to and feel somewhat safe from COVID.

With this being said I am still really upset that I am not able to attend school in person.

I don’t quite understand how I am allowed to travel to other places (and soon international travel), but I cannot go to school which is less than 7km away.

I understand that you make a lot of hard decisions and cannot please everyone, I would just love to know what is the reasoning behind this as I have started to not enjoy school, at the start of online school and before that I have always loved school but as online learning has continued I have started to not love it and it has become a place I don’t enjoy.

Molly is not alone.

Her questions are neither unreasonable nor remarkable. Parents, students and teachers ask my electorate office every day why this is the case: how do these rules make sense?

From last year when school holidays were dragged forward to start on 22 March the school gate has been a revolving door where students have never really felt like there was any certainty to face-to-face teaching. For regional Victoria that has been largely untouched by the pandemic there have been some concessions, but, frankly, not near enough.

The people of Benambra are not COVID conspiracy theorists; they are, however, pragmatic and realistic. They are in touch with the changing seasons, the world around them, and they have an acute and sensitive BS meter.

They want answers. They want to understand. And like Molly, they just want to know why students were stopped from going to school.

Box Hill North Primary School

Mr HAMER (Box Hill) (6095)

My adjournment matter is for the Minister for Education.

The action I seek is for the minister to provide an update on the upgrade at Box Hill North Primary School

I was very pleased to see $3.8 million committed in the 2020–21 Victorian state budget to upgrade and expand facilities at this terrific local school. This investment will provide a state-of-the-art upgrade that will accommodate an additional 100 students to meet the growing needs of our local area.

Box Hill North Primary School includes the Box Hill CBD within its school zone. The Box Hill CBD is growing very rapidly, with lots of new apartments and new families that are moving in. And it is fantastic to see that the Andrews Labor government is accommodating the needs of our community by providing the education infrastructure our kids and educators need and deserve.

For over two decades the school has also operated an on-site kindergarten (Box Hill North Primary School Kindergarten). The upgrade will not only provide for additional school classrooms but will also facilitate a smoother pathway for kinder children as they transition into primary school—easing the pressure on parents during what can be a stressful time.

Under the guidance of principal David Pelosi, Box Hill North Primary School is going from strength to strength. And, as with all principals from across the Box Hill electorate, Mr Pelosi has shown extraordinary leadership over the last two years to guide the school through the most tumultuous time of its existence.

I thank all of our local principals for the amazing work that they have done in 2020 and 2021, and I look forward to seeing our children back in the classroom very soon.