Review of the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 (Vic) The issues and options paper also discussed the VLRC’s review of the VOCA Act and its relationship to the Council’s reference. The review considered the operation and effectiveness of state-funded assistance to victims in Victoria. The VLRC provided its advice to government by 27 July 2018. The VLRC’s review sought submissions on a number of matters, including: the mechanisms for the state to seek from an offender recovery of a payment of an award under the VOCA Act; the introduction of a victims’ levy to supplement state-funded victims’ compensation; and the potential for the victims’ financial assistance scheme to incorporate restorative justice opportunities. Changes to the scheme for assistance in Victoria – including increased recovery from offenders of payments under the VOCA Act and changes to the categories or amounts of assistance available under the VOCA Act – may have implications for the use and enforcement of restitution and compensation orders. The Council that the VOCA Act has been amended to remove the time limit of two years for applications in relation to child abuse. Reforms to assist victims of institutional abuse The Victorian Parliamentary Inquiry that resulted in the 2013 Betrayal of Trust report outlined how survivors of institutional child abuse face significant barriers in recovering compensation for the abuse they suffered. In particular, the Betrayal of Trust report found that identifying the correct organisational entity against which to bring civil proceedings is a major obstacle to seeking civil compensation where child abuse
sentence’, while another was opposed to such an expansion because they considered victims’ reparation to ‘almost be part of rehabilitation’. The Council also that a focus on financial compensation could overshadow other recognition that a victim may receive. The Council’s view In light of the above considerations and the lack of stakeholder support, the Council does not believe that the purposes of sentencing should be expanded to include victims’ financial reparation. The Council is of the view that the arguments against making restitution and compensation orders sentencing orders, discussed at outweigh those in favour of an expansion of the purposes of sentencing. The benefits for victims in receiving recognition of their financial losses through such a purpose of sentencing are likely to be largely symbolic. Sentencing orders for financial reparation are likely to create a false expectation for victims that they are more likely to receive compensation, which, given the large proportion of offenders without financial resources, is not realistic (see at [1.39]–[1.43], [4.7]–[4.22]). Victims’ financial reparation is best achieved through the existing framework of restitution and compensation orders, sitting outside the purposes for which sentences are imposed, as ancillary orders, as well as through an appropriately funded and accessible state-funded compensation system. Expanding the purposes of sentencing could lead to differential sentencing outcomes depending on an offender’s financial capacity. In addition, the current legislative framework allows for financial (and losses sustained by victims to be appropriately considered by sentencing courts as a factor in determining sentence.
Department of Human Services (Cth), ‘Child Support Collect’ (humanservices.gov.au, 2018) Department of Human Services (Cth), ‘Recovering Child Support Payments’ (humanservices.gov.au, 2018) Department of Human Services (Cth), ‘The Assessment Formula’ (humanservices.gov.au, 2018) Department of Justice, Reviewing Victims of Crime Compensation: Sentencing Orders and State-Funded Awards (Department of Justice, 2009). Department of Justice and Regulation, ‘Asset Confiscation’ (justice.vic.gov.au, 2018) Department of Justice and Regulation, ‘Betrayal of Trust Implementation’ (justice.vic.gov.au, 2018) Department of Justice and Regulation, ‘Family Violence Scheme – Fines Victoria’ (justice.vic.gov.au, 2017) Department of Justice and Regulation, ‘Victorian Government Response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse’ (justice.gov.au, 2018)
Victoria, 2013) Victoria Legal Aid, Annual Report 2014–2015 (2015) Victoria Legal Aid, Annual Report 2016–2017 (2017) <https://www.legalaid.vic.gov.au/annual-report>. Victoria Legal Aid, ‘Explainer – Why We Fund Serious Criminal Cases’ (legalaid.vic.gov.au, 2018) Victoria Aid, ‘Means Test’ (handbook.vla.vic.gov.au, 2017) <https://handbook.vla.vic.gov.au/handbook/12-means-test>. Victoria Police, Submission to the Victorian Law Reform Commission Reference on The Role of Victims of Crime in the Criminal Process (Victoria Police, 2015) Victorian Auditor-General’s Office, Asset Confiscation Scheme (Victorian Auditor-General’s Office, 2013) Victorian Auditor-General’s Office, Follow Up of Asset Confiscation Scheme (Victorian Auditor-General’s Office, 2016) <https://www.audit.vic.gov.au/report/follow-asset-confiscation-scheme>. Victorian Government, ‘The 227 Recommendations’ (vic.gov.au, 2018) <https://www.vic.gov.au/familyviolence/recommendations.html>. Victorian Law Reform Commission, Review of the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996: Supplementary Consultation Paper (Victorian Law Reform Commission, 2017)