Tuesday, 13 August 2024

Youth justice system

John PESUTTO (Hawthorn – Leader of the Opposition) (14:10): My question is to the Premier. The government is banning victims and their families from having a say over whether young offenders are released on parole. Why is the Premier seeking to silence victims and their families?

Jacinta ALLAN (Bendigo East – Premier) (14:11): The Youth Justice Bill, which has passed through this place and is currently being debated in the Legislative Council, legislates for the very first time the voices and the experiences of victims of crime in the process around parole considerations. This is part of the Youth Justice Bill that also includes a requirement around young offenders listening to the experience of victims of crime, because we know that when young offenders hear directly from those victims they have a deeper understanding of the grief they have caused, and we know that this is important for helping young people to turn their lives around. We have an opportunity this week in the Parliament to strengthen community safety and to turn young people’s lives around, and it is a question for the opposition whether they will support this task.

Brad Battin: On a point of order, Speaker, in relation to relevance, when you go and have a look specifically at the bill, what the Premier is trying to have –

The SPEAKER: Succinctly.

Brad Battin: Succinctly. We are talking about relevance and what we are talking about specifically in this bill. The Premier is trying to mislead the house directly about what is within that bill and stating that the victims can be heard when the bill specifically says that victims cannot be heard in relation to this part of the bill.

The SPEAKER: The Premier was being relevant to the question that was asked. The Premier has concluded her answer.

John PESUTTO (Hawthorn – Leader of the Opposition) (14:13): Noting the Premier’s answer to the substantive question, the government’s bill in the other place states at proposed section 622 that:

If the Youth Parole Board receives information from a person on the Youth Justice Victims Register, the Youth Parole Board must not have regard to that information when determining whether –

…

to grant parole to a child or young person …

Why does the Premier have no respect for the voices of victims and their families?

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Berwick is warned.

Jacinta ALLAN (Bendigo East – Premier) (14:14): I was asked about respect for victims of crime. My respect for victims of crime goes deeply to why we are taking the actions we have announced today to keep our communities safe – to ensuring that, building on the work that has been done to date, we listen very carefully to victims of crime, their experience and how we have an opportunity to strengthen the laws in this state. The Youth Justice Bill that is before the Legislative Council does provide for that restorative justice approach. It does provide for a new youth justice victims register.

James Newbury: On a point of order, Speaker, standing order 58 does require the Premier to be factual. The question went specifically to a clause of the bill that requires something which is the exact opposite of what the Premier is now saying. The Premier is required to be factual, and I would ask you to bring her to the question that was asked.

The SPEAKER: I cannot determine whether the Premier is being factual or not. The Premier to come back to the question.

Jacinta ALLAN: I was asked about respect for victims of crime. Demonstrating our respect is that we are putting in the bill –

James Newbury: On a further point of order, Speaker, on relevance, the Premier was asked a very direct question about a clause of the bill. The Premier was not asked about any other matter, and I would ask you to direct the Premier back to the actual section which was read out to her.

The SPEAKER: The question, I believe, was: why does the Premier have no respect for the voices of victims and their families? The Premier was being relevant to the question.

Jacinta ALLAN: I point to the bill, which has a new youth justice victims register. The way we show respect to victims of crime is by passing the bill that is in the upper house this week.

James Newbury: On a point of order, Speaker, we are seeing again the Premier refuse to answer questions. We have just asked a very direct question where a clause of a bill was read to the Premier, and the Premier has refused to deal with the substance of the question. This is a joke, and I would ask you to bring the Premier to the actual questions that are being asked.

The SPEAKER: The Premier has concluded her answer. However, as I mentioned in my last ruling, the Premier was answering the question that was asked. I remind members that in the past the practices of this house regarding relevance have been interpreted to mean the minister must address the response to issues raised in the question. That is clear. However, I also remind members that under standing order 58(2) I cannot direct the minister how to answer a question, nor can the minister be compelled to answer in a certain form or manner just because the member asking the question desires a particular answer or a particular form of words in the answer.

The house is very aware that I am in its hands when it comes to making rulings about standing and sessional orders that it has agreed to. The house is able to change the rules surrounding questions and answers if it so desires. However, I can only refer to current rules when judging the appropriateness of questions and answers, and I must be guided by precedence and past practice when interpreting how to apply those rules. If the house desires new rules, it may change them. However, until then I will be guided by the rulings and practice that have preceded my tenure in this house.

John Pesutto: On a point of order, Speaker, about relevance, I note your comments that the Premier cannot be compelled to provide an answer. Can I ask whether the Premier will undertake to this house to come back to this house with an answer about what specifically the Premier was referring to. I put in my question a deliberate and explicit reference to a clause in the Premier’s own bill. The Premier only responded in general terms. I simply ask: if we cannot compel the Premier to answer, will the Premier undertake to at least come back to this house with an answer?

The SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

James Newbury: On a point of order, Speaker, on your ruling, firstly, I note in relation to your offer about any proposed amendments to the standing orders, we attempted to move some this morning and the government blocked those being moved. I do want to put that on record.

The SPEAKER: There is no point of order.

James Newbury: Speaker, further to your ruling, I seek your guidance on standing order 58. Standing order 58 also requires that an answer be direct. I put it to you that answering generally is clearly in contrast to responding directly. I would say to you that you have the power to require a minister to respond directly. If they are not answering the question in any way, they are not responding to the question.

The SPEAKER: There is no point of order.