Book 8 - Parliament of Victoria

CRIMES AMENDMENT (BULLYING) BILL 2011
1544 COUNCIL Tuesday, 31 May 2011
done by cyberbullying are very important programs.
We are pleased that the Alannah and Madeline
Foundation, which had initially been chosen to run that
campaign, will be able to run that campaign in the
manner in which it was originally chosen so to do. We
welcome that decision in the same way that we
welcome this bill.
To restate the matters that I raised earlier in my
contribution, we want to be convinced — and I am
absolutely sure the government would agree — that it is
important that nobody takes the view that this
legislation by stiffening up the provisions of the Crimes
Act 1958, in any way diminishes anybody’s
responsibilities to deal with bullying. Nobody should
see this as a green light to turn a blind eye. Nobody
should see this as now being somebody else’s problem.
This is an augmentation of all our current
responsibilities and all our current laws in regard to
bullying, not a substitution. Whether someone is an
employer or a union official, or someone who witnesses
or hears about bullying in the workplace, they should
not believe that anybody’s responsibilities in that regard
have been diminished in any way because we are now
amending the Crimes Act 1958.
This is an important piece of legislation. This is about
strengthening the ability of Victoria Police, the
government and the courts to deal with bullying and to
ensure that those individuals who take it upon
themselves to make other people’s lives a misery, in
whatever manner they choose to do it, feel the full force
of the law. For that reason, we wholeheartedly support
the bill.
Ms PENNICUIK (Southern Metropolitan) — The
Greens will be supporting the Crimes Amendment
(Bullying) Bill 2011. As we know, the amendments
that the bill makes to the Crimes Act 1958 and to the
Stalking Intervention Orders Act 2008 will be known as
Brodie’s law as a result of the horrendous campaign of
bullying, harassment and humiliation that Brodie
Panlock endured between the ages of 18 and 19 at the
hands of three of her coworkers at Cafe Vamp in
Hawthorn, one of whom she was having a relationship
with. The employer at the time, according to the
coroner and from all that we can see in the evidence
before us, did nothing to prevent it. Tragically it
resulted in Brodie Panlock taking her own life.
I take the opportunity to extend my deepest sympathies
to her parents, Rae and Damian Panlock, and to all her
family and friends, who must still be suffering daily
from the loss of Brodie and in particular the horrendous
experience and circumstances that led to her death. It is
apt that these amendments are named after her. It is as a
result of what happened to her and the series of events
afterwards that have led to us having the bill before us
today.
It is also sad that in the last week we have heard about
the experience of another young man, 17-year-old
Allem Halkic, who also took his life. His parents were
awarded compensation by the Victims of Crime
Assistance Tribunal due to its ruling that his death was
the result of a violent act, that act being cyberbullying,
to which he was subjected to an amazing degree and
which resulted in him taking his life. These are very
important issues that are before us as parliamentarians.
Cyberbullying has not been around long — it has only
been around since we have had cyberspace — but
bullying itself has been around for a long time. It has
not perhaps had the attention that it deserves.
I was also pleased to hear that the Alannah and
Madeline Foundation will be continuing its work on
cyberbullying. I would not like to see that dropped,
because it is an important area and perhaps needs to be
expanded. It is young people we are talking about —
two young people in this instance, one 19 years old and
one 17 years old. It is young people, vulnerable people
and people who are not sure of themselves, who are in a
powerless situation and are most often the victims of
bullying. Bullying can only occur when one person or
group of people feels they have power over another
person — they may have such power due to age or
position in the hierarchy of a workplace, for
example — and they exercise that power over the other.
It is totally unacceptable when it results in ruining that
person’s life, making their life a misery or, as in these
two cases, in the death of the victim.
Thousands of people experience bullying at home, at
school, in the workplace or in other settings, but the
workplace is probably the most common or obvious
setting where bullying can occur. The bill before us
does not restrict itself to workplace bullying, but that is
where most of the attention has come from. Mr Pakula
mentioned that the previous government sent a
reference to the Victorian Law Reform Commission to
look into the issue of bullying and how it could best be
addressed, and the VLRC made the finding that the best
way to deal with it was to amend the Crimes Act 1958
in the way that is before us today in the bill. However,
it should be noted that the VLRC’s website only says
that the Attorney-General has withdrawn the reference
and makes no mention of the views of the commission
regarding the merits of the review.
If we had had time for a full review, I would have been
surprised if the Victorian Law Reform Commission had
come out with just that recommendation and had not