Mr PALLAS (Tarneit) I too rise to speak on the Family Violence Protection Amendment Bill 2014 and the amendments made in the other place. Firstly, I note that the bill proposes to amend the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 to enable family violence safety notices to be issued outside of court hours. The questions attached to the timeliness and the definition of court hours are clarified with respect to the matters that are currently the subject of debate in this place. Secondly, the bill enables certain family violence intervention orders to become final orders without a further court hearing. The bill also allows for the publication of reports about family violence, charges and convictions without obtaining an order. The default commencement date of the legislation is identified as 18 September 2015, which ensures that justice agencies will have sufficient time to complete all the implementation activities.

 This legislation deals with a scourge that affects our community and one that quite rightly is increasingly becoming a matter of public comment and concern. In my own electorate of Tarneit, recent figures for the local government area of Wyndham show that it has one of the worst family violence rates in metropolitan Melbourne. I do not say that to be critical in any way of my community but to recognise its huge population growth and demand for local government area services. The efficient work of police in that area has identified that in the 2011-12 year a staggering 1536 family violence incidents were reported to police, compared to 669 incidents in 2007-08. Increasingly the issue of domestic violence is seen to be an issue that can affect anyone. Incidents of domestic violence occur regardless of age, class, income, country of origin and indeed religious or cultural background. It is a scourge that afflicts our entire community, and it is one that quite rightly has the attention of this house and is being responded to with this legislation.

The steps provided for in this legislation benefit from the broader regime put in place by the Labor government, including the original Family Violence Protection Act 2008, a stand-alone family violence act which provided a targeted and cohesive response to the issue of family violence. It was groundbreaking legislation which sought to do a number of things: to provide a comprehensive definition of family violence, to extend the definition of a family member, to broaden the use of holding power provisions and to ensure an enhanced system of family violence intervention orders. It changed the way evidence was given in a court, it gave police greater powers of search and seizure and it strengthened the provisions for the protection of children, the interests of whom, together with the victims, if they be beyond that scope, are a paramount consideration in the servicing of the act.

The family violence safety notices in the new act follow several years of extensive consultation. The Victorian Law Reform Commission recommended that the Magistrates Court implement a system of interim intervention orders for after-hours situations rather than using the existing practice of police completing a complaint form and seeking a warrant to arrest the alleged perpetrator. Such a process placed an unnecessary burden on the police in terms of the principal objective — that is, ensuring that the threat to the family members was effectively removed as quickly and efficiently as possible.

Even the now Attorney-General during debate in 2008 suggested that it would probably be better if a workable system of on-the-spot applications to a magistrate could be put in place rather than applications being issued simply by authorisation within the police force.

In practice the family violence safety notices are for situations where a police officer believes that until an application for a protection order can be decided by a court a notice is necessary to protect a child or to preserve property. When police issue such notices they may attach certain conditions to the order, including conditions that exclude someone from his or her home. Evaluation of the family violence safety notices showed that they were an effective tool for police in responding to after-hours family violence incidents, leading to increased safety for victims and holding perpetrators accountable for their behaviour.

The data released showed that in a 15-month period police issued some 3909 family violence safety notices, and in 84 per cent of cases the alleged perpetrators were removed from the home. Following the evaluation of the trial in 2010, family violence safety notices remained a permanent fixture and, might I say, an important tool for police to respond to family violence matters and incidents with. There has been a significant shift for the better in community attitudes. It is a recognition that these incidents are unacceptable and that hardening of the community’s attitude to the insidious nature of family violence has been occurring over the past decade. It is now accepted by a majority in the community that family violence is unacceptable and abhorrent, and that is part of the ongoing responsibilities we have. Victoria Police has been successful in bringing about significant cultural change within its ranks.

Family violence went from being referred to as ‘just a domestic’, to use the language of bygone years, to being treated as the crime that it is. Police command and the Police Association have acknowledged the revolution within Victoria Police and have deemed family violence the no. 1 law and order issue facing Victorians. Finally and appropriately, we have a recognition of the insidious nature of this crime, and it is getting the attention of both the legislature and the police, with the police enabled and empowered by these legislative tools to ensure safety in our homes.

Labor believes that a sensitive and effective response by police and by courts can be the difference between a family violence victim who endures years of harm and intimidation and a victim who is able to recover from the crime and live a safe and fulfilling life.

The bill introduces the ability for a court to attach a finalisation order to an interim order, having the effect of the interim order becoming a final order if the respondent does not challenge the order within 28 days of being personally served. A finalisation order will be made where the court, police and the affected family agree it is appropriate. It is therefore not intended to apply to offenders for whom court oversight should be maintained — for example, where there is a history of dangerous behaviour. Such orders cannot be made in cases where the respondent is a child, where the respondent has a cognitive impairment or where the order would be inconsistent with a family law order. The opposition is of the view that this is a shortcut; it is more about demand management and less about enhancing the threefold purpose of the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 to maximise safety for women and children, to prevent and reduce family violence and to promote the accountability of perpetrators.

 It is apparent that the government has attempted to address some of the concerns that were identified in the drafting of the bill. However, significant concerns remain, particularly where there will be missed opportunities for risk assessment of women and children, all too often including the stories we hear day to day of real harm affecting real families in our community. Often intervention by the justice system can be motivation for a perpetrator to get help and deal with their offending behaviour. After the bill was released the problems were pointed out, and we see that the government is now frantically backpedalling, but it is nonetheless making changes to improve the content of the bill.