Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Criminal Code Amendment (Protecting Commonwealth Frontline Workers) Bill 2024 will strengthen protections for Commonwealth frontline workers who face increased risk of violence or aggression because of their role. In the financial year 2022-23 there were 10 million visits by members of the Australian public to 318 Services Australia service centres across Australia. Six thousand Services Australia staff worked with their customers in service centres to help sort out their Medicare, childcare, age pension, unemployment or a range of other payments that occur at various points in a person's life.

However, in the same financial year there were 9,000 reported acts of aggression against these frontline workers. Indeed, in the first six months of this financial year alone there were 6,092 incidents, of which 852 were serious. Tragically, the number of serious assaults is up by 261 on the previous year. Self-evidently, one assault on a staff member is one too many. Indeed it's almost a year to the day—23 May last year—that a Services Australia team leader's life was changed forever when she was viciously stabbed in her workplace. Joeanne Cassar was doing a job that she loved and has worked at for many years. She did so very well at the service centre located in the suburban shopping mall at Airport West, where she became the victim of a knife attack. I have met with Joeanne several times since the stabbing. I met her in hospital that week, where she was supported by her husband Andrew, and I met with her workmates. Last week I was able to deliver to her husband and to her workmates details about how the Albanese government is seeking to make them safer, including through this bill. I'd like to take a moment, though, to acknowledge Joeanne's strength, resilience and grace over this past year. We should almost rename the bill the 'Joeanne Cassar Bill.' She has a hard road ahead. She has a permanent injury, which won't change. But she wants to make sure that this can't happen again or that it can be prevented, to the best of our abilities, from happening to another frontline public servant.

The people who work at Services Australia service centres are the engine room of our social security safety net and our Medicare safety net. They make sure that Australians can get the services and payments that they're entitled to when they need them. They're trained to deal with complex and, at times, unpleasant situations, and they set the bar high with their professional, compassionate interactions with members of the public. They see people who may be having their worst day—the loss of a job, a family breakdown, a health issue or the uncertainty of options for an ageing parent. However, we do know that a small cohort of people take that frustration out on Services Australia staff or other customers. Stress, vulnerability and personal frustration are never an excuse for violence. It doesn't matter how bad a day someone has, there's never ever a reason for aggressive behaviour towards staff or another customer. It's totally unacceptable.

The Albanese government wants to make sure that the people who are there to help Australians in their time of need can go to work and come home safely and that they work in a safe environment. The day after the stabbing of Joeanne Cassar, I initiated a review of staff safety at all 318 service centres around the country. On the night of her stabbing, I contacted former Victorian Police Commissioner Graham Ashton to see if he was prepared to deploy his many years of meritorious policing experience to give me and the government answers to how we could make the service centres more secure for both staff and customers.

The Services Australia Security Risk Management Review, conducted by the former commissioner Ashton, found that Commonwealth frontline workers are facing increasingly violent and aggressive behaviour in the workplace in their dealings with the public, which also endangers other members of the public. In his review, Graham Ashton made 44 recommendations to Services Australia. The agency is implementing all 44.

In October of last year, I was able to announce that the government had committed an interim $47 million for immediate measures, including hundreds of additional security guards, enhanced security features incorporated into the design of service centres and improved training. Many of the service centres are in shopping centres and other busy places to ensure they're accessible to the public. We must do everything we can with the best advice possible to provide a safe environment for the 10 million visitors to Services Australia sites every year.

At the beginning of this month, at Airport West, with Joeanne Cassar and her husband, Andrew, standing alongside me, I announced that the government will invest a further $314.1 million over the next two years to continue to improve safety in service centres. That's in addition to the $47 million announced in October. The new $314 million investment will help the agency to fund up to 606 security guards, up from about the 200-plus that we had before these changes, which means there are two guards at service centres where there are higher levels of customer aggression. It will help with the redesign of an additional 35 services centres, with enhanced features to reduce the risk of harm to staff, as well as expand the customer self-check-in kiosks to service centres at risk of high levels of customer aggression. This will minimise queueing, which, for this cohort of people I referred to earlier, has been reported as a source of frustration. There will be an upgrade to security systems and enhanced security features at all service centres, and we’re going to establish a centralised security operation centre to help the agency respond in real time to customer aggression incidents in any of the offices. The funding will also see the implementation of a new agency-wide system to better record, view and manage incidents of customer aggression, and there will be increased liaison with local law enforcement.

There will be more work done with the Department of Social Services to improve the policy for and accessibility to urgent payments. This includes the use of electronic benefits transfer cards to safely assist customers who don't have access to a bank account. But, specifically, with the legislation and the amendments to the Criminal Code today, I talk of the implementation of recommendation 18 of the Ashton review, which called for amendments to the Commonwealth Criminal Code to increase the penalties available for causing harm or threatening to cause harm to a Commonwealth public official where the official is also a Commonwealth frontline worker.

The Criminal Code Amendment (Protecting Commonwealth Frontline Workers) Bill, which the Attorney-General introduced into parliament in March, promotes the right to safe and healthy working conditions and enhancing protections against violence and abuse for frontline staff. Specifically, the bill will increase the maximum penalties in the Criminal Code for causing harm or threatening to cause serious harm to a Commonwealth frontline officer. It does this by aligning the penalties for causing harm or threatening to cause serious harm to a Commonwealth frontline worker with the penalties that apply for the same conduct against a Commonwealth judicial officer or Commonwealth law enforcement officer. In other words, there won't be two classes of frontline Commonwealth public servants. It doesn't matter if you wear a badge and carry a gun or if you're just working at the Medicare or Centrelink office, you'll have the same protections under law of penalties for assault.

Specifically and further, where a member of the public causes harm to a Commonwealth public official, under section 147.1 of the Criminal Code the maximum penalty will increase from a maximum of 10 years to a maximum of 13 years imprisonment. In addition, where a person threatens to cause serious harm to a Commonwealth public official, under section 147.2 of the Criminal Code the maximum penalty will increase from a maximum of seven years to nine years imprisonment.

A 'Commonwealth frontline worker', as defined by this bill, is a Commonwealth public official who performs work requiring a person to deal correctly—whether or not in person—with the public or a class of the public as a primary function of their role.

The lessons from Miss Cassar's assault now mean that we will seek to cover service centre staff and team leaders, including face-to-face and virtual service centres, as well as security guards, call centre operators, inspectors and compliance officers, such as officers exercising monitoring or investigation powers under the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2015. It will cover interpreters, front-facing staff at electorate offices and service staff at relief and emergency centres, such as during a natural disaster. These categories have been included in the amendments to reflect the diversity of Commonwealth frontline worker roles, from service delivery to regulatory functions. It will likely cover an extra 100,000 Commonwealth public servants.

While the bill we bring forward today deals with recommendation 18 of the Ashton review, there is also a body of work underway to introduce legislation to address recommendation 17, which relates to protection orders. Members may not be aware, but currently if someone assaults, threatens to harm or becomes fixated on a Commonwealth worker or their agency, the reliance is on using existing state and territory protection orders. A majority of these schemes place the onus on the individual to take out a protection order in their own name. The current law, as it stands, requires that if an individual Centrelink worker, Medicare worker, childcare worker or electorate officer feels the need to take out an apprehended violence order, they have to do it themselves. There's no ability for the employer or employing agency to take it on their behalf. This means that individual staff have a re-traumatising experience, not to mention an administrative burden at an already stressful time.

The fact that the offender may have a problem with their employer or the government, and not them personally, is now being recognised. The legislation being developed will look at protection orders already in place in the ACT, as a model for the Commonwealth framework. These allow the individual workplace to be the sponsoring entity for such orders. It will expand it to cover, as I said, staff working in electorate officers, who are often assisting vulnerable people in touch with acute supports, but too often face acts of aggression in their workplaces that cross over into threatening behaviour.

In conclusion, the Albanese government is not just talking about protecting frontline staff. We're genuinely acting, through the major financial investment that I outlined and by pursuing legal avenues of deterrence. The funding I've outlined and the amendments which support it send a powerful message to our very important Commonwealth frontline workers that we value them, and that violence and aggression towards them will not be tolerated and will be met with serious penalties.

I do note that, in speaking on this bill, the opposition have indirectly implied that somehow this is all down to cost-of-living impacts on family budgets and wait times. The cohort of people actually committing these offences is not a large number of the people who use the system. It's a small number. Most are known to those working at Services Australia and many have complex mental health needs or significant vulnerabilities. Many are already on managed service plans, meaning they have specific servicing arrangements over the phone or in writing and are prohibited from physically presenting at the service centre. Certainly, in proposing this legislation, I do not think that the vast, vast bulk of users of our system are anything other than excellent customers, but none of us in this place would put up with the threat of aggression which increasingly faces Commonwealth frontline workers.

We're fixing overdue loopholes, which treats our frontline workforce as important. Every worker in Australia should feel safe in their work environment, knowing that they'll return home after their shift without having had their mental or physical health threatened. We need to take the stress off the shoulders of the people we ask to look after some of our most vulnerable citizens. Commonwealth frontline workers are there for Australians in their hour of need and the government will protect them.

Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Community Safety, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I congratulate the minister, too. I think it's very important that there is legislation like the Criminal Code Amendment (Protecting Commonwealth Frontline Workers) Bill 2024 to protect those who work for the Commonwealth in areas such as Centrelink, the Australian Taxation Office, passport offices, airports, the AEC and other government services across the country. There are over 100,000 staff working in places like Services Australia and the tax office et cetera.

Sadly, already this year there have been 9,000 incidents with aggressive customers when it comes to these Commonwealth workers. That's quite astounding when you think that among, roughly, over 100,000 workers, 9,000 have dealt with very aggressive customers. Last year, before the Voice referendum, AEC staff were subject to very high levels of cruelty online and were physically and mentally abused. This is just totally unfair when they're just doing their jobs to serve the government and serve the Australian people. In 2012 a Centrelink worker in Queensland was attacked by a woman who swung a chair and a bag at her desk. The worker ended up having a high level of mental illness history. This form of violence is totally unacceptable when people are going to work.

The legislation was born out of Services Australia's Security Risk Management Review. I congratulate the minister, Bill Shorten, for this review, as well for having someone like Graham Ashton on it. I worked under Graham for a short time when I was in Victoria Police. He was a fine chief commissioner of police and someone who very much puts the public first. This was the result of a worker, Joeanne, being attacked with a bladed weapon while working in the Airport West Services Australia centre in 2023. It seems quite outrageous that someone would think it's okay to come in and do that. Okay, you may have a grievance, but to get to the stage where you're actually assaulting and attacking someone like Joeanne is simply outrageous. I congratulate the minister on visiting her and making this commitment to her.

The bill amends existing offences for causing or threatening to cause harm to Commonwealth public officials in the Criminal Code. The bill creates a new category of Commonwealth official, called a Commonwealth frontline worker, whose primary function involves dealing with the public. As we heard the minister talk about before, this brings AFP staff or Australian Border Force staff into line—they are all now treated as equal. Back in my day in the Victorian police force, we saw offences increase when it came to aggravated assaults and assaults on women, and also when it came to law enforcement. I acknowledge the penalties have increased to a maximum of 13 years—but when governments increase penalties, the clear and simple message is to the courts in particular: the public expects to have higher penalties dished out when it comes to sentencing. For those who threaten to cause serious harm to Commonwealth frontline workers, the penalty rises from seven to nine years jail, which I support. But, again, we need the courts to take these very seriously and to make sure that those perpetrators who are responsible, when it comes to threatening behaviour, assaults et cetera, are harshly dealt with for their behaviour. That's because quite often when a person is going to a Centrelink office, there are other people there too, with children, and it not only affects the person who is serving them but also the public, who are quite often in a vulnerable situation themselves. A penalty must be strong penalty.

I note, too, that there are 278 additional guards in the bill, bringing the total to 513 guards. I very much welcome this, because quite often that's a deterrent. We call it 'waving the flag'. Someone walks in there and sees the security guard in the corner and thinks, 'Okay, I'm being watched here; if I do misbehave, I'll have the security guard, if not the police, being called to arrest me.' Five large service centres are to have additional security features, such as customer service check-in kiosks and enhanced IT security with greater security alerts. It's so important to make sure staff are trained in that. The 500 frontline staff will be trained when it comes to delivering advanced customer aggression training.

In all, I welcome this legislation, and I'm hoping that, when it comes to those working in these fields, they feel a bit more comfort and support from the government and the wider Australian community. For those who think it's okay to threaten and harm and attack, I'm hoping the courts dish out just punishments to them.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—The member for La Trobe gave a great talk and I appreciate very much his support and I pay respect to his policing career. When I mentioned there were 9,000 reported acts of aggression in the first six months of this year, that wasn't against all 100,000 staff; that was against 6,000 frontline Services Australia staff, which is actually amplifying the members point. That means that chances are every staff member on the frontline will experience one of these acts in the course of a year. These changes cannot guarantee absolute safety, but we are taking the best advice possible from people with frontline police experience.

I specifically acknowledge the work of the former chief commissioner of Victoria Police, Graham Ashton. He turned the report around in eight weeks, which might set some of the big four consultancies a new KPI. What is also pleasing is my colleagues in the government have agreed to all of these measures to implement the changes, and we have actually got on and done it. The clear message to the courts made by the Parliament's intent with the increased penalties—it's an excellent point made by the member for La Trobe. I would reiterate: it is a clear message to the courts.

Finally, the victim of the assault of 23 May, Joeanne Cassar, will be very heartened by the support of the opposition. There's no scenario where it wouldn't have been better that she had never been stabbed, self-evidently, but she is a very public-conscious lady and a professional, and she sees a silver lining in the parliament doing this legislation. I thank all the members for their contributions in the debate.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment.