Introduction and first reading
Danny O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (09:46): I am very pleased to rise to support the member for Caulfield, and I will speak on the issue that he is trying to bring this bill in to address, not some straw man that those opposite are really more interested in talking about.
A member interjected.
Danny O’BRIEN: You are picking and choosing what you want to debate.
The SPEAKER: Order! Member for Gippsland South, you have been warned. I will sit you down. Through the Chair.
Danny O’BRIEN: On that point, Speaker, this is a debate about whether we have a debate on this legislation. Yesterday in this chamber we had the Premier saying on another piece of legislation that it was not a government bill, as though this Parliament is only for the government, as though the Parliament is not the representative of the people and does not have the opportunity to bring in legislation. The Premier went on to say they did not want to debate that bill because the opposition often gets it wrong. They are saying the same thing again today – well, bring it on. If the government does not think that our bills are right, if the government is not prepared to actually put –
Brad Battin interjected.
Danny O’BRIEN: Exactly. It is not brave enough to have the debate. Do not just shut us down. This is the people’s Parliament. It is a Parliament for the people; it is not a Parliament for the government or the executive.
This legislation that the member for Caulfield is trying to bring in is about giving some public order back to our state, because we have seen it over the last couple of years absolutely diminished. This legislation will get the balance right between ensuring that people have the right to protest and freedom of speech, but also that people going about their business literally – businesses in the CBD and elsewhere – and people moving through our cities and towns have opportunity. It also means that we have law and order right throughout the state.
As the member for Caulfield indicated, in the last two years 22,000 police shifts have been dedicated to 500 protests here in the city. That is not 22,000 police sitting around who are waiting for protests; they have to come from somewhere else. They have come not only from the suburbs but from our regional centres as well. Only last week I was speaking to a local police officer who is at his wit’s end with the resourcing issues that they are facing. This is one of the issues. They are constantly having to send people to cover shifts elsewhere, and in many cases it is because of these protests that are going on.
This is not just an issue for the city, it is an issue of public law and order right throughout our state, and to be honest, people are fed up. They are fed up not just with the protests that cause chaos and sometimes lead to violence, sometimes lead to violence against police, but they are fed up with the crime on the streets, and the poor police just do not have the resources to address them. I hear it time and time again. I have got family in the force, and they say they are dealing with what comes at them and nothing else because they do not have the resources, and protests are one of the reasons. This bill would get the balance right. We would introduce the protest registration system, and that system would give those who are doing the right thing protection from certain prosecution, such as for obstruction.
We know that the vast majority in the protests that occur do the right thing. I can think of the emergency services tax protest that blocked Spring Street and Bourke, where they did the right thing. There was disruption, yes, but they had already spoken to the police. That is an example of how this system would work. They would be registered. They would also have some protection against issues like obstruction.
There are those, though, who are not interested in peaceful protest. If you turn up to a protest wearing a ski mask, you – generic, Speaker – are not there for a peaceful protest. If you are doing that, then you are clearly not there to peacefully protest. That is why this legislation would also put in a ban on masks, because if you are turning up with a ski mask or a balaclava to a protest –
A member interjected.
Danny O’BRIEN: or goggles – you have actually got to question your peaceful intent. I am all for freedom of protest and freedom of speech. This legislation would get the balance right. I commend the work of both the member for Caulfield and the member for Malvern, who have been working on this for some time – not talking about it like those opposite, who promised 240 days ago to do something. Now is your opportunity. Bring it on for debate and let us talk about it.
The SPEAKER: I remind members that the use of the words ‘you’ and ‘your’ is a reflection on the Chair, in whatever context they might be presented.