Tuesday, 4 February 2025

Bail laws

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (13:49): My question is again to the Minister for Youth Justice. Minister, since your government weakened bail laws in Victoria crime has increased 15 per cent, aggravated burglaries are at a record level and youth crime is the highest on record. Given the government’s decision to review bail laws, why did your government block the Liberal and Nationals bill to strengthen bail laws last year?

The PRESIDENT: I am happy to call the minister, but I expect that he will refer this to the Attorney-General’s and the police minister’s responsibilities.

David Davis: On a point of order, President, the minster is responsible for part 3B of the relevant act, under the administrative orders. He cannot simply abscond from responsibility. He is responsible; that is what the administrative orders say. He is jointly responsible with the Attorney-General for that section of the Bail Act.

Jaclyn Symes: On the point of order, President, I just refer to the question and the way that it was posed by Mr Davis, because he is trying to connect it to the Minister for Youth Justice, whereas their draft bail bill did not apply to children.

The PRESIDENT: I do not think that was a point of order. The minister can answer as far as his responsibility in his portfolio goes.

Enver ERDOGAN (Northern Metropolitan – Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice) (13:51): I thank Mr Davis for his question and his interest in the criminal justice settings, in particular bail. But I think I was clear in the answer to the previous question that these are matters, in relation to bail as a whole, that under the general orders would fall within the remit of the Attorney-General in the other place. I am happy to pass on that question to her for a written response in line with the standing orders. I note as well that I reject the premise, Mr Davis. Last year we in fact strengthened the bail laws, in particular for repeat serious offenders, and you voted against that. You voted against strengthening the Bail Act and those reforms we made in the Youth Justice Act which are about holding young people to account. I think appropriately, President, that should be referred to the Attorney-General, so I will seek your guidance.

The PRESIDENT: The question was not addressed to the Attorney-General. You have answered that it is not your responsibility, so it will not be passed on to the Attorney-General.

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (13:52): With respect to the government’s review of the bail laws, I ask the minister: how long will the government’s review process take, and when will the government change the bail laws?

Enver ERDOGAN (Northern Metropolitan – Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Corrections, Minister for Youth Justice) (13:52): I refer to my answer to the substantive, Mr Davis. That work in relation to the bail work is being led by the Attorney-General. The Premier was quite clear. The standing orders are quite clear. I refer that question appropriately. It should be directed to the Attorney-General in the other place.

David Davis: On a point of order, President, it is very clear that the review of bail laws will deal with youth matters, and it is also very clear that the minister has joint responsibility for a large section of the Bail Act – section 3B, to be specific – in the administrative orders. He indicated that he will be contributing to that review in an earlier question today. My question to him is a very specific one: how long will the government’s review process, which he is contributing to, take?

The PRESIDENT: The minister has been clear that this is not a process he is leading. It is a process that he may be asked to contribute to. He has indicated that it is not his responsibility as far as his portfolio goes.

David Davis: On a point of order, President, is what you are saying here that the minister can just simply say he is not responsible, even though the administrative orders say he has responsibility and he has indicated he will contribute? He may not know when the matter will conclude. He may not know how long the review is. He is quite entitled to say, ‘I don’t know how long,’ but he is not entitled to say, ‘I’m just not going to answer it.’

The PRESIDENT: I suppose, taking your rationale, Mr Davis, the minister for TAFE may not know when the Attorney-General is going to finish a review, which is outside her responsibility. The recourse for you if you do not believe the minister’s answer is correct is you have a right to move a motion to take note of his answer or move a substantive motion at some time when we move to motions. I do not think we need to have a long debate on the orders and what they mean.

David Davis: On a point of order, President, respectfully, it is very plain when you read the administrative orders that a clear section of the Bail Act is jointly administered by this minister. The Bail Act is under review. He has indicated that he is actually going to contribute to this review. It is entirely reasonable to see him having some responsibility in this. He may or may not know the timeline – I accept the facts on that – but he cannot just simply say, ‘I’m not responsible at all’ when the administrative orders are plain. He does have some responsibility jointly with the Attorney-General.

The PRESIDENT: I think it has been very clear for the last two years it is not for me to question when a minister says that whatever question has been asked of them does not fall inside their responsibility. We have gone forward with that for the last two years and it is a ruling that has been set previous to me as well, so it is not anything new. The minister has responded that that question should be the responsibility of the Attorney-General, and that is his answer.