Home » Publications » Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996: Report (html) » 17. Improving awareness and accessibility of the proposed victims of crime financial assistance scheme

Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996: Report (html)

  • Posted on September 19, 2018

17. Improving awareness and accessibility of the proposed victims of crime financial assistance scheme

Introduction

17.1 This chapter reviews, and makes recommendations in relation to, improving awareness and accessibility of the proposed new state-funded financial assistance scheme (the proposed scheme).

17.2 This chapter relates to issues raised in the first matter specified in the supplementary terms of reference which ask the Commission to consider whether the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 (Vic) (VOCAA) can be simplified to make it easier for applicants to understand all their potential entitlements, and easily access the assistance offered by the scheme without necessarily requiring legal support.

17.3 In Chapter 8, the Commission recommends that the VOCAA be repealed and replaced with an Act (the proposed Act) establishing the proposed scheme and incorporating the legislative reforms recommended in this report. In making this recommendation, the Commission noted the importance of plain language in legislative drafting, and suggested the use of plain language in the drafting of the proposed Act would address some stakeholder concerns with the complexity of the VOCAA.[1]

17.4 This chapter addresses matters of awareness and accessibility beyond provisions of the proposed Act. Recommendations in this chapter aim to ensure the establishment of the proposed Act and scheme is supported with:

• community engagement and awareness activities to improve the general awareness and understanding of entitlements under the proposed Act

• sector training and education to improve referrals to the proposed scheme, and to enable victims to be better informed and supported throughout the process by support workers and legal practitioners

• a new suite of forms and information to improve accessibility of the proposed scheme for a broader range of victims.

17.5 In particular, this chapter considers the importance of plain language, and other accessible legal information, which is critical to access to justice.[2] As stated by the Commission in its report Plain English and the Law:

It is a matter of social justice that the legal professional communicates effectively with the community, as it is fundamentally important that everyone affected by the law should be able to understand it.[3]

17.6 Before turning to consider stakeholder views in relation to awareness and accessibility of the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal (VOCAT), to provide context for discussing broader awareness and accessibility matters, this chapter begins by considering the number of victims accessing VOCAT as outlined in the Commission’s first and supplementary consultation papers.

The number of victims accessing VOCAT

17.7 Based on statistical analysis of family violence and VOCAT data, the Commission’s first consultation paper noted that the small number of family violence-related VOCAT applications recorded for 2015–16 (388) appeared disproportionate to the number of family violence incidents recorded that same year (78,628).[4]

17.8 Similarly, in the Commission’s supplementary consultation paper, an comparison of Victoria’s Crime Statistics Agency’s data on victim reports[5] with the number of VOCAT applications, suggested that approximately nine per cent of all potentially eligible victims are making applications to VOCAT.[6]

17.9 Accordingly, in relation to both family violence victims, and victims of crimes against the person, the Commission noted that the small number of VOCAT applications was disproportionate to the number of victim reports and recorded incidents of family violence, which suggested that there may be a high level of unmet need.[7]

17.10 In this context, VOCAT, the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria and the Children’s Court of Victoria agreed in their submission that there was significant unmet demand under the existing scheme:

Approximately 9 per cent of all victims of crimes against the person apply to VoCAT for financial assistance. This low figure may be due to a general lack of awareness of VoCAT and the financial assistance process in Victoria, or reflect the difficulty for applicants to understand their potential entitlements and quickly and easily access the assistance offered by the scheme, without legal support.[8]

17.11 However, as acknowledged in the Commission’s supplementary consultation paper, the seemingly low rate of victims accessing VOCAT is not unique to the Victorian state-funded financial assistance scheme.

17.12 Awareness of state-funded financial assistance schemes appears to be low in many Australian and international jurisdictions. For example, in an analysis of Australian victim compensation schemes, Betty Chan et al observed that only a small proportion of victims access financial assistance schemes in Australia.[9] Similar findings have been found internationally, including in the United Kingdom and the United States of America.[10] A 2008 study in the United States of America suggested up to 95 per cent of eligible victims do not apply for state-funded financial assistance.[11]

Responses

Victims’ awareness of VOCAT

17.13 There was agreement among most stakeholders in both the written submissions and during consultations that awareness of VOCAT or entitlements under the Act was low among victims.[12]

17.14 The Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria submitted that:

One of the key non-legislative barriers for victims/survivors is awareness. Many victims/survivors of family violence are not aware of the Act, their legal rights or entitlements. This is particularly so for Aboriginal victims/survivors many of whom face a number of barriers, including lower levels of formal education and limited knowledge of legal rights and options and the legal system more broadly.[13]

17.15 Other stakeholders told the Commission that if 90 per cent of eligible victims are not accessing VOCAT, then the system needs to be more accessible and responsive.[14]

17.16 Victims’ representatives of the Victims of Crime Consultative Committee told the Commission that the onus should not be on victims to seek out information about state-funded financial assistance, find relevant services or make appointments on their own.[15]

17.17 A variety of views were expressed by stakeholders, and victims themselves, about when and how victims might learn about VOCAT. Some victims told the Commission that they found out about VOCAT a long time after the crime occurred, and only then ‘by chance’.[16] Similarly, Hume Riverina Community Legal Service and CASA Forum submitted that it was common for victims to find out about VOCAT after the two-year time limit for an application had expired.[17] Some victim support workers described awareness of VOCAT among victims as ‘mixed’,[18] ‘varied’[19] or ‘hit and miss’.[20] Other stakeholders suggested victims simply ‘learn along the way’ during the criminal justice process.[21]

17.18 Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers submitted that awareness of VOCAT was ‘crime dependent’.[22] Some stakeholders said that awareness of VOCAT is more problematic for certain victim cohorts, including:

• family violence victims[23] and sexual assault[24] victims

• victims experiencing disadvantage,[25] including homelessness[26]

• victims with capacity[27] or mental health issues[28]

• victims from non-English speaking backgrounds[29] and diverse communities[30]

• victims of institutional child abuse[31] or historical offences perpetrated when a victim was a child.[32]

17.19 The Commission was also told that a victim’s awareness of VOCAT is often reliant on service system connections.[33] For example, the Commission was told that victims linked in with the Victims Assistance Program (VAP) often had good awareness of VOCAT since all VAP clients are advised of VOCAT eligibility.[34] On the other hand, other stakeholders told the Commission that awareness and understanding of VOCAT is low even among support agencies and police.[35]

17.20 Despite the overall agreement among many stakeholders that awareness of VOCAT was low, stakeholders nonetheless identified a range of referral points to VOCAT for victims, including:

• police[36]

• community agencies/support organisations[37]

• family violence services[38]

• victim support agencies[39]

• lawyers[40]

• courts[41]

• health professionals.[42]

17.21 A number of stakeholders considered Victoria Police to be a vital source of information and referral to VOCAT.[43] While a number of stakeholders suggested there were varying levels of police referral of victims to VOCAT,[44] others suggested referrals by police were improving.[45] In particular, stakeholders identified specialist police units like Sexual Offences and Child Abuse Investigation Teams (SOCITs) as significantly improving awareness of VOCAT amongst victims.[46]

17.22 Other stakeholders said the existing scheme relies on victims, particularly family violence victims, identifying themselves as a victim of crime[47] and reporting a crime to police, which does not always occur.[48]

Broader community awareness of VOCAT

17.23 Some stakeholders suggested broader community awareness of VOCAT was low,[49] and that an extensive awareness campaign was needed.[50]

17.24 The Commission was told that after a crime occurs, victims often only ‘vaguely’ recall that there might be a ‘victims of crime’ service, but do not know any specifics.[51] Other stakeholders agreed, submitting that victims will often use ‘victims of crime’ as an internet search, which can be problematic as victims may mis-identify services[52] and mistakenly think that they have made contact with VOCAT when in fact they have contacted a private company.[53]

17.25 Given the lack of awareness of VOCAT in the general community, a number of stakeholders submitted that a general community awareness campaign was required, like those used by the Transport Accident Commission (TAC) and WorkSafe.[54] One submission also suggested VOCAT undertake more community outreach work.[55]

17.26 Domestic Violence Victoria members told the Commission that information needed to be ‘widely broadcast’ through universal services including general practitioners, helplines, family relationship centres, courts and lawyers.[56] Some stakeholders suggested posters be made available in Easy English and other community languages, and placed at local community health centres, legal centres, train stations, supermarkets and cultural centres.[57] Eastern Community Legal Centre also submitted that information was needed at hospitals, police stations, community houses and offices of government departments.[58]

Support sector awareness of VOCAT

17.27 Stakeholders also told the Commission that awareness and understanding of VOCAT is low even among support agencies and police[59] and that community organisations needed training and education to increase their awareness of VOCAT and to improve their ability to support victims through the financial assistance process.[60]

17.28 Both Hume Riverina Community Legal Service and Springvale Monash Legal Service submitted that funding should be allocated to community legal services to promote state-funded financial assistance and provide community education sessions about the process.[61] In this context, the Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria also submitted that investing in culturally safe and specialist community legal education and early intervention programs are critical to building Aboriginal awareness of entitlements.[62]

17.29 Raising sector awareness of state-funded financial assistance was highlighted as a key function of the respective administrative schemes by victims’ commissioners in both New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory.[63]

17.30 The NSW Commissioner of Victims Rights told the Commission that part of her role is to advocate on behalf of victims and to raise awareness of the supports available with victim-support agencies on the ground. This includes raising awareness with support services that specialise in domestic violence and sexual assault, as well as organisations that work with the LGBTIQ community, the Aboriginal community, multicultural communities and the disability sector. To support this work, Victims Services NSW has a small community engagement team.[64]

17.31 Similarly, the ACT Victims of Crime Commissioner told the Commission that community engagement activities have resulted in increased awareness of the ACT scheme, particularly among key support and community agencies following completion of around 120 community engagement activities, along with associated website and radio promotion activities. The ACT Victims of Crime Commissioner told the Commission that the ability to undertake comprehensive community engagement activities was one of the benefits of moving from a court-based model to an administrative model.[65]

Accessibility of VOCAT

17.32 Some stakeholders told the Commission that little had been done in 20 years to improve the accessibility of VOCAT,[66] that it was a ‘bureaucratic nightmare’, and that most victims do not know how to access it.[67]

17.33 Stakeholders raised concerns about the accessibility of VOCAT in four main ways:

• the practical accessibility of VOCAT, particularly accessibility of its forms and information

• cultural barriers to accessing the existing scheme, such as barriers for particular victim cohorts

• structural barriers to accessibility, such as VOCAT being part of the court system and victims needing to engage lawyers to access the existing scheme

• technical barriers to accessibility as a result of the VOCAA’s complexity and extensive documentary evidence requirements.

17.34 In Part 3 of this report, the Commission considered structural barriers to accessibility of VOCAT (being part of the court system and victims needing to engage lawyers) and in Part 4, technical barriers to accessibility (as a result of the extensive documentary evidence requirements). In Chapter 10, the Commission also examined accessibility of the existing scheme for Aboriginal victims of crime, including the current operation of VOCAT’s Koori List. In that chapter, the Commission made recommendations in relation to specialisation under the proposed scheme which, among other things, aims to improve accessibility of the proposed scheme for particular cohorts of victims.

17.35 This chapter does not discuss structural and technical barriers, nor does it consider specialisation in detail. This part of the chapter considers and makes recommendations only in relation to:

• the practical accessibility of VOCAT, particularly accessibility of its forms and information

• cultural barriers to accessing the proposed scheme, such as barriers for particular victim cohorts.

Accessibility of VOCAT forms and information

17.36 A number of stakeholders raised concerns about the accessibility of the VOCAT forms and documentation requirements under the VOCAA.[68]

17.37 While some stakeholders told the Commission that forms should be revised so that they are easy enough for victims to complete on their own,[69] victims of crime also told the Commission that following a serious crime, many victims are simply focused on ‘surviving’ and therefore, may be unable to complete even simple forms.[70]

17.38 However, many stakeholders did not consider the VOCAT application form to be simple. For example, stakeholders submitted that the application form is not simple for many family violence victims to complete because the form requires information about ‘single’ acts of violence as well as details of a report to police, neither of which may apply in family violence situations.[71] The Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria also submitted that the VOCAT form fails to recognise the complexity of family violence and may discourage victims from making an application.[72]

17.39 Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria submitted that the form uses complex legal concepts, such as ‘primary’, ‘secondary’ and ‘related’ victims.[73] Similarly, Project Respect submitted:

The complexities of legislative text can be challenging for the general public, and even more so for those who speak English as a second language or have had limited education. In order to practice self-determination and autonomy it is integral for women to fully understand their legal rights and entitlements.[74]

17.40 Support organisations agreed that the use of legal concepts in the application form meant victims would be unlikely to understand the requirements without assistance.[75] The Commission was told that the VOCAT application form was too difficult for victims to complete on their own without support,[76] emphasising the need for victims to have support when completing forms.[77]

17.41 Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria also submitted that the form asks victims to provide information about whether they have received financial assistance from other sources such as through WorkSafe or TAC which may raise concerns that victims will be disadvantaged if they have applied for funds from other sources.[78]

17.42 On the other hand, the submission by VOCAT, the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria and the Children’s Court of Victoria noted the increased numbers of applications lodged since the implementation of a new online VOCAT form, suggesting the accessibility of the VOCAT form had improved. They submitted, for example, that:

commencement of online application capability in 2016 resulted in a 17 per cent jump in applications, indicating that the need to lodge a physical application might have deterred some victims from seeking VoCAT assistance.[79]

17.43 However, the Commission was also told in some consultations that the online application form was problematic.[80] Some lawyers raised concerns about victims attempting to undertake the VOCAT application process unsupported by submitting an online application form, but then requiring lawyers to ‘take over’ when issues arise.[81] One lawyer suggested that the online form was inefficient and confusing as once it had been submitted online, the form has to be posted back to the applicant to sign before being sent back to VOCAT again which victims find confusing.[82] The Commission was told that it is not uncommon for victims to attempt to make VOCAT applications on their own, but later engage lawyers because issues arise.[83]

17.44 A number of stakeholders said that the VOCAT forms and information should be revised and:

• made more accessible, including published in other languages or other formats for people with disability[84]

• made available in plain English[85]

• designed from a client-centred perspective[86]

• should accommodate varied experiences of victimisation, including family violence and other forms of violence that may involve multiple incidents or patterns of violence over time[87] including acknowledging the cumulative impact of family violence[88]

• in line with Victorian Government’s LGBTIQ strategy, provide alternate options to the tickboxes of ‘male’ and ‘female’.[89]

17.45 The submission by VOCAT, the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria and the Children’s Court of Victoria also agreed that ‘simplifying the administrative processes involved in lodging and progressing VoCAT applications is an important part of improving the scheme’s accessibility’.[90]

Cultural barriers to accessibility

17.46 Eastern Metropolitan Regional Family Violence Partnership submitted that:

Multiple non-legislative barriers exist for victim-survivors of family violence in accessing VOCAT. Using a lens of inclusion and acknowledging that every woman’s experience is unique means it is crucial to consider issues such a fear of authority and a complete distrust of institutions as legitimate non-legislative barriers to women in accessing VOCAT.[91]

17.47 Other stakeholders told the Commission that for some communities, there might be a stigma associated with accessing VOCAT which creates a cultural barrier to accessing the existing scheme.[92] For example, Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria submitted that women from culturally and linguistically diverse communities often face multiple barriers to accessing VOCAT including cultural stigma and isolation exacerbated by a lack of accessible information.[93]

17.48 Cultural barriers to accessibility were also raised in relation to more specific and vulnerable members of the community, such as women working in the sex industry or victims with a disability. For example, Project Respect submitted that:

Women in the sex industry (WISI) and survivors of trafficking report a multitude of barriers to access legal help or services … This can be due to many reasons such as past stigma and mistreatment from police, language or cultural barriers and fear of reprisal from pimps and traffickers. Women from [culturally and linguistically diverse] backgrounds are highly represented in the sex industry.[94]

17.49 CASA Forum also submitted that victims of sexual assault or family violence who have disabilities may not be aware of their right to apply to VOCAT, particularly if they have high support needs and may not be able to access information independently.[95]

17.50 The Commission was told that to address cultural barriers to accessibility, the victims require information in plain English, Easy English, languages other than English and in non-written forms such as animation and audio.[96] In particular, stakeholders submitted that the current form was not inclusive as it does not cater to intersectionality including victims from the LGBTIQ community, women from migrant and refugee backgrounds, women with disability and women with low literacy.[97] The Commission was also told that forms and information should be accessible for people with disability.[98]

17.51 A small number of submissions raised issues relating to victims not accessing the existing scheme due to feelings of not being ‘worthy’.[99] It was suggested that this might apply to more marginalised victims—such as male victims of family violence.[100]

17.52 As discussed in Chapter 10, the joint submission by the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria and VOCAT highlighted VOCAT’s Koori List as a key initiative of the Tribunal to improve its accessibility for Aboriginal victims of crime.[101] The Magistrates’ Court of Victoria and VOCAT submitted that the VOCAT Koori List aims to improve accessibility through:

• experienced and culturally aware magistrates, registrars and administrative staff

• continuity in the management of each application (the same magistrate manages an application from start to finish)

• culturally appropriate venues and communication

• a strong community engagement element to raise awareness of the List and to encourage dialogue with communities.

17.53 The Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria also noted that the VOCAT Koori List was introduced to improve VOCAT’s accessibility for Aboriginal victims and to strengthen the Tribunal’s capacity to respond to Aboriginal victims of crime in a culturally appropriate and respectful manner.[102] The Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria submitted that while they strongly support the aims of the VOCAT Koori List, they also submitted that ‘in recent years a number of our clients’ experiences of the system have not differed markedly from the general administration of the [VOCAA]’.[103]

17.54 In addition, the Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria submitted that the VOCAT Koori List was under-resourced, resulting in lengthy delays.[104]

Discussion and recommendations

17.55 As outlined above, statistics suggest access to, and awareness of, VOCAT is low, with many stakeholders agreeing that many victims are unaware of VOCAT and their entitlements under the VOCAA.[105]

17.56 These findings are also consistent with previous Victorian research in relation to VOCAT, including research by:

• Women’s Legal Service Victoria in 2015, which found that many victims of family violence are simply unaware of the existence of VOCAT[106]

• Victims Support Agency in 2011, which found a general lack of awareness and understanding of VOCAT, even among victims who had been through the VOCAT process[107]

• Whittlesea Community Legal Service in 2011, which found a lack of awareness among victims regarding financial assistance available through VOCAT.[108]

17.57 Although awareness of compensation and state-funded financial assistance has been raised as one of the most critical barriers to the effectiveness of any victims of crime financial assistance or compensation scheme,[109] awareness of such schemes appears to be low in many Australian[110] and international jurisdictions.[111] Geneviève Parent has observed in relation to the equivalent state-funded financial assistance scheme in Quebec, Canada that many victims only learned about the scheme ‘accidentally’.[112]

17.58 In the Commission’s view, some issues relating to awareness and accessibility of the proposed scheme are likely to be addressed by the proposed model—an administrative scheme embedded within an independent agency whose mandate includes advocating for the recognition, inclusion, participation and respect of victims of crime.[113] Key to this approach is the ability for a dedicated administrative decision maker to undertake community engagement activities to raise awareness of the proposed scheme.[114] The Commission was told that community engagement activities in the Australian Capital Territory and New South Wales have resulted in increased awareness of their state-funded financial assistance schemes, particularly among key support and community organisations.[115] Such activities in New South Wales are supported by a community engagement team that creates partnerships with organisations to increase awareness and access to the scheme.[116]

17.59 However, beyond matters relating to the model of state-funded financial assistance, the Commission considers that a number of further initiatives are required to improve awareness and accessibility of the proposed scheme. Outlined below are the Commission’s conclusions in relation to three broad areas of reform:

• engagement and training

• improved forms and information

• specialisation to increase accessibility.

Engagement and training

Community engagement and awareness raising

17.60 Njeri Mathis Rutledge has suggested that state-funded financial assistance schemes need to ‘be more diligent in trying to reach victims. If anyone can be the victim of a crime, then everyone should know [Crime Victim Compensation] funds exist.’[117] Rutledge suggests schemes should conduct appropriate outreach activities and establish partnerships with media.[118]

17.61 In Australia, Chan et al have suggested that a potential way to raise awareness of victims’ financial assistance schemes is to advertise assistance through the media, similar to the way in which Lifeline contact details are provided during reporting of serious incidents.[119]

17.62 The Commission notes the initiatives undertaken in the Australian Capital Territory to increase awareness of the ACT scheme, including conducting around 120 community engagement activities, along with associated website and radio promotion activities since the establishment of the new administrative scheme in 2016.[120]

17.63 In Victoria, both the Transport Accident Commission (TAC)[121] and WorkSafe[122] use public awareness campaigns to raise awareness of their organisations, along with aiming to prevent transport and workplace accidents.[123] For example, WorkSafe’s Annual Report for 2017 stated:

Public awareness campaigns contribute to the community service measure, by delivering safety and prevention messages across the community … our approach to raising awareness has expanded to include targeted channels. We use digital and social media to address specific audiences, such as young workers and culturally and linguistically diverse communities, with tailored messages. We are increasingly adopting an ‘always on’ approach to campaigns, so that audience reach and impact are greater.[124]

17.64 In the Commission’s view, broad awareness campaigns are crucial given victimisation can be ‘unpredictable’ and ‘unexpected’.[125] In this context, the greater general awareness a victim has before crime, the more likely they will be to recall that a service may be available to them after a crime has occurred.

17.65 Accordingly, the Commission considers:

• that the proposed new state-funded financial assistance Act (proposed Act) should provide that ongoing community engagement and public awareness activities are an essential component of the proposed scheme

• the proposed scheme should be required to report annually[126] on community engagement and public awareness activities undertaken, and that such activities should be part of the proposed scheme’s key performance indicators.

17.66 Additionally, the Commission considers that the Victims of Crime Commissioner, as the proposed scheme administrator, should be provided with appropriate funding and resourcing to enable ongoing community engagement and public awareness activities about the proposed scheme.

Sector training and education

17.67 Despite a substantial body of literature confirming that victims of crime want timely information about the types of support and services available to them,[127] stakeholders told the Commission that awareness and understanding of VOCAT is low even among support agencies and police.[128] Research in other jurisdictions suggests up to half of all eligible victims are not advised of the right to financial assistance, significantly impacting a victim’s access to such schemes.[129] The importance of victim support and other criminal justice agencies advising victims of the right to seek financial assistance was highlighted by Betty Chan et al who noted that victim support and advocacy groups:

play an important role in enabling victims to … overcome the barriers to seeking help from [financial assistance] schemes. They understand the complexity of the circumstances that victims face and they are experienced in helping the victim navigate the different services they may need.[130]

17.68 Accordingly, some stakeholders suggested that community organisations needed training and education to increase their awareness of VOCAT so as to improve their ability to support victims through the financial assistance process.[131] For example, the Law Institute of Victoria submitted that increased training is needed to help professionals in the broader family violence system to identify when a victim may be eligible for state-funded financial assistance.[132]

17.69 The Commission notes VOCAT’s current activities with respect to sector training and education. For example, in 2016–17 VOCAT’s Supervising Magistrates provided structured information and training to police recruits about the important role Victoria Police play in assisting victims to access VOCAT.[133] In addition, VOCAT convened a VOCAT user group in 2017 to enable the Supervising Magistrates, Principal Registrar and other Registry staff to meet with representatives of the legal profession who regularly assist VOCAT applicants.[134] VOCAT also state in their Annual Report that they ‘regularly attend at or present at relevant community engagement forums’.[135]

17.70 In the Commission’s view, further funding and resources are required to engage more effectively with the broader victim support sector, as well as less specialised services. Although some victims will access specific victim services, other victims may access less specialised services following a crime, such as general practitioners (GPs), hospitals or private psychologists or counsellors. If a broader range of victim support and general services are well informed about the proposed scheme, the numbers of victims referred to the proposed scheme are likely to increase.

17.71 The Commission notes that a 2008 study in the United States of America piloted active outreach through a trauma recovery service to improve access to its state-funded financial assistance scheme. Active outreach was found to increase the overall proportion of victims applying for compensation—in fact, of the sample group provided with active outreach and support to submit an application, only three per cent did not submit a financial assistance application.[136] This is in comparison with close to 90 per cent of potentially eligible victims in Victoria not making an application to VOCAT.

17.72 Ongoing sector training and education are vital to ensure victims are informed by frontline workers about the proposed scheme. Accordingly, the Commission considers that:

• the proposed Act should provide that ongoing sector training and education regarding the proposed scheme, including the training and education of victim support workers, advocates and legal professionals, are an essential component of the scheme.

• ongoing sector training and education activities should form part of the proposed scheme’s day-to-day operations and key performance indicators, and such activities should be appropriately funded and resourced.

17.73 In addition, the Commission considers that the proposed scheme should undertake more specific and targeted outreach activities with relevant frontline and community sector organisations, including police, victim support organisations, hospitals, community health organisations, culturally and linguistically diverse and LGBTIQ advocacy organisations, Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations and legal services, to improve the numbers of victims accessing state-funded financial assistance. Such targeted outreach activities could include promoting the proposed scheme to both staff and victims attending these services as well as co-locating scheme staff at these locations on a part time basis to assist victims with submitting applications or paperwork to increase the overall accessibility of the proposed scheme.

17.74 Targeted outreach activities could be leveraged off existing outreach activities in Victoria, including the current co-location of Victims Assistance Program services at Victoria Police stations across Victoria.[137] Outreach activities such as co-location would improve geographic spread of locations where victims can engage with the proposed scheme, which should help improve its accessibility for victims in rural and regional areas of Victoria.

Recommendations—engagement and training

90 The proposed Act should:

(a) provide that ongoing community engagement, public awareness and sector training and education activities regarding the proposed scheme are an essential component of the proposed scheme, including the training and education of victim support workers, advocates and legal professionals

(b) provide that the scheme decision maker must:

(i) undertake targeted outreach activities regarding the proposed scheme with relevant frontline and community sector organisations including police, victim support organisations, hospitals, community health organisations, culturally and linguistically diverse advocacy organisations and legal services, to improve the numbers of victims accessing state-funded financial assistance

(ii) report annually on community engagement, public awareness and sector training and education activities.

91 The proposed scheme should be appropriately funded and resourced to enable ongoing community engagement, public awareness and sector training and education activities about the proposed scheme to be conducted.

92 Annual reporting on community engagement and public awareness activities undertaken should be part of the proposed scheme’s key performance indicators.

Improved forms and information

17.75 A number of stakeholders raised concerns with the current VOCAT application form and information.[138] Concerns were raised in relation to:

• the application form’s complexity[139] and use of legal concepts[140]

• the fact that many victims would be unlikely to be able to complete the application form on their own[141]

• the fact that the current application form did not cater to different victims’ needs.[142]

17.76 A number of stakeholders said that the VOCAT forms and information should be revised and made more accessible, including being published in other languages or other formats for people with disability,[143] made available in plain English,[144] designed from a client-centred perspective[145] and accommodate varied experiences of victimisation.[146]

17.77 Concerns with the VOCAT application form were also raised in Victims Support Agency research in 2011 where a victim of historical childhood sexual assault said the application form was not suitable for sexual assault victims.[147] Similarly, stakeholders told VOCAT in 2010, as part of its review of the pilot Koori List, that:

correspondence was too complex for Koori applicants to understand. Lawyers can understand the correspondence and filing requirements, but if this information is sent directly to applicants, they can get turned off by the process.[148]

17.78 As noted in the introduction to this chapter, providing information about the legal system in plain language, and other accessible formats, is critical to access to justice.[149] The Commission also noted in its 1987 report (republished in 2017) that writing in plain English improves accessibility, and can also decrease costs associated with the administration and application of legislation.[150]

17.79 The Commission notes the contrast between the VOCAT application form and the form for Victim Impact Statements produced by the Department of Justice and Regulation. While the Victim Impact Statement form is also a legal form, being a statutory declaration submitted to the court during the sentencing phase of a criminal trial, it has been designed to provide more guidance, information and space for a victim to convey their story in a more sensitive and victim-friendly way.[151] Similar ‘victim-friendly’ information has also been used by the Office of Public Prosecutions in relation to victim and family member reports for submission to the court under the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 (Vic).[152]

17.80 As noted above, the provision of forms and information in plain language and other accessible formats is critical to access to justice.[153] As observed by the Department of Justice and Regulation in its Access to Justice Review, accessible legal information can enable individuals to resolve their legal problems independently.[154]

17.81 The need for plain language is particularly important in relation to matters such as eligibility. Current information in relation to eligibility under the existing scheme uses legally defined terms such as ‘primary victim’ or ‘secondary victim’ but not all victims will necessarily understand whether they are a ‘primary’, ‘secondary’ or ‘related’ victim as defined by the VOCAA. These definitions then determine how and where a victim may be required to apply to VOCAT. For example, applications need to filed in different ways or locations depending on whether the applicant:[155]

• is a related victim

• is a primary or secondary victim who is aware of the existence of a related victim

• resides outside Victoria

• identifies as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander and should be managed within VOCAT’s Koori List.

17.82 In Chapter 14, the Commission made a number of recommendations to address some of the complexity with making an application,[156] as well as to take into account the experiences of victims of family violence.[157] These changes aim to ensure the application form is more accessible to victims who have experienced violence over time rather than a one-off incident of violence.

17.83 Further to these recommendations in Chapter 14, the Commission considers that the proposed scheme decision maker should, as an integral part of the establishment of the proposed scheme, review and redesign all forms and information. In particular, the Commission notes stakeholder concerns that forms and information should be published in other languages, other formats for people with disability,[158] and be made available in plain English.[159]

17.84 In reviewing and redesigning all forms and information, the proposed scheme decision maker should ensure they are available in plain language as well as different formats and languages, including Easy English, formats for victims with disability and victims from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. In addition, the Commission considers that forms and information should be:

• appropriate and accessible for victims of all crime types, including family violence and other types of crime where the effects may be cumulative, or where the offences may have occurred over time

• victim-centred and victim-friendly in their design, including

• providing more guidance to victims who may be completing the form without assistance

• leaving appropriate space for a victim to convey their story in their own words

• avoiding unnecessary technical or legal language

• not being unnecessarily lengthy.

17.85 In order to ensure accessibility of forms and information beyond the initial establishment phase of the proposed scheme, the Commission considers it important that the proposed Act require all forms and information relevant to the proposed scheme be in plain language, readily available and in a range of formats.

Recommendation—forms and information

93 The proposed Act should provide that all forms and other information relevant to the proposed scheme must be in plain language, readily available and accessible in a range of formats.

Specialisation to increase accessibility

17.86 As noted in Chapter 10, increasing specialisation within the proposed state-funded financial assistance scheme should also improve accessibility for specific victim cohorts.

17.87 Specialisation within the proposed scheme will enable the proposed scheme’s staff and decision makers to apply the relevant legislation more efficiently to the specific needs or circumstances of particular victims, and will ensure victims using the proposed scheme come into contact with staff with a better understanding of the nature, features and dynamics of particular crimes or circumstances. In the Commission’s view this approach will help ensure a beneficial approach for victims with specialised needs as well as improving scheme accessibility for victims who might otherwise face barriers in accessing the proposed scheme.

17.88 The Commission’s recommendations in relation to specialisation are set out in Chapter 10.

19.4

  1. In Chapter 8, the Commission notes that the Victorian Office of the Chief Parliamentary Counsel’s Plain English Policy requires the office to, among other things, use plain language in the drafting of legislation: Office of the Chief Parliamentary Counsel (Vic), Plain English Policy (accessed 31 May 2018) <www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domino/web_notes/LDMS/pubhome.nsf/KW/OCPC!OpenDocument&ExpandSection=5,1#_Section5>.

    ↑

  2. See generally Department of Justice and Regulation (Vic), Access to Justice Review: Volume 1 Report and Recommendations (Victorian Government, 2016) 131.

    ↑

  3. Victorian Law Reform Commission, Plain English and the Law (2017) vii.

    ↑

  4. Victorian Law Reform Commission, Family Violence and the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996, Consultation Paper (2017) 135.

    ↑

  5. The Commission used the number of ‘victim reports’ rather than recorded offences, as such reports represent the potential number of individual victims who may be eligible for VOCAT rather than the number of recorded crimes for that period, noting that one ‘incident’ might result in multiple recorded offences but only have one victim.

    ↑

  6. Victorian Law Reform Commission, Review of the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996, Supplementary Consultation Paper (2017) 166–7.

    ↑

  7. Ibid 167.

    ↑

  8. Submission 59 (Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, Magistrates’ Court of Victoria and Children’s Court of Victoria).

    ↑

  9. Betty Chan et al, ‘Support and Compensation: Lessons from Victims of Crime’ (Paper presented at the Actuaries Institute Injury Schemes Seminar, Gold Coast, 10–12 November 2013) 17.

    ↑

  10. Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (United Kingdom), Criminal Compensation Issues Paper: A Summary of the Themes Raised by Respondents (2017) 4; Jennifer Alvidrez et al, ‘Reduction of State Victim Compensation Disparities in Disadvantaged Crime Victims through Active Outreach and Assistance: A Randomized Trial’ (2008) 98(5) American Journal of Public Health 882, 882; Maarten Kunst et al, ‘Performance Evaluations and Victim Satisfaction with State Compensation for Violent Crime: A Prospective Study’ (2015) 32(19) Journal of Interpersonal Violence 1, 2.

    ↑

  11. Jennifer Alvidrez et al, ‘Reduction of State Victim Compensation Disparities in Disadvantaged Crime Victims through Active Outreach and Assistance: A Randomized Trial’ (2008) 98(5) American Journal of Public Health 882, 882.

    ↑

  12. Submissions 6 (Forgetmenot Foundation Inc), 10 (Eastern Metropolitan Regional Family Violence Partnership), 15 (Merri Health Victims Assistance Program), 26 (Hume Riverina Community Legal Service), 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria), 43 (knowmore), 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria), 51 (Law Institute of Victoria); Consultations 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice), 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres), 4 (Victim, Witness and Court Support), 7 (Family Violence and Advocacy Organisations), 8 (Victims Representatives—Victims of Crime Consultative Committee), 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies), 11 (Regional Consultation with Victoria Legal Aid—Gippsland), 12 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Victim Support Agencies), 13 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Legal Professionals), 16 (Regional Consultation – Ballarat Legal Professionals), 25 (Children’s Court of Victoria).

    ↑

  13. Submission 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria).

    ↑

  14. Consultation 15 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  15. Consultation 8 (Victims’ Representatives—Victims of Crime Consultative Committee).

    ↑

  16. Ibid.

    ↑

  17. Submissions 26 (Hume Riverina Community Legal Service), 30 (CASA Forum).

    ↑

  18. Consultation 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members).

    ↑

  19. Consultation 15 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  20. Consultation 12 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  21. Consultation 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  22. Submission 38 (Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers).

    ↑

  23. Submission 30 (CASA Forum); Consultations 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres), 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members), 13 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  24. Submission 30 (CASA Forum).

    ↑

  25. Consultation 7 (Family Violence and Advocacy Organisations).

    ↑

  26. Consultation 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres).

    ↑

  27. Submission 30 (CASA Forum); Consultations 7 (Family Violence and Advocacy Organisations).

    ↑

  28. Consultation 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres).

    ↑

  29. Submission 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria); Consultations 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres).

    ↑

  30. Submissions 36 (Name withheld), 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria); Consultation 17 (Family Violence Diverse Communities and Intersectionality Working Group).

    ↑

  31. Consultation 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres).

    ↑

  32. Consultation 13 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  33. Ibid.

    ↑

  34. Consultations 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies), 15 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Victim Support Agencies), 23 (Community Safety Trustee, Victoria).

    ↑

  35. Consultation 16 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  36. Submissions 10 (Eastern Metropolitan Regional Family Violence Partnership), 18 (cohealth), 38 (Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers); Consultations 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice), 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres), 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  37. Consultations 2 (Legal Professionals – Private Practice), 7 (Family Violence and Advocacy Organisations), 10 (Regional Consultation —Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  38. Submissions 10 (Eastern Metropolitan Regional Family Violence Partnership), 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria); Consultation 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice).

    ↑

  39. Submissions 18 (cohealth), 38 (Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers); Consultations 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice), 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  40. Consultations 3 (Legal Professionals – Community Legal Centres), 7 (Family Violence and Advocacy Organisations), 10 (Regional Consultation – Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  41. Submissions 38 (Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers), 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria); Consultations 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres), 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  42. Submission 38 (Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers); Consultation 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  43. Submission 38 (Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers); Consultations 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice), 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres), 4 (Victim, Witness and Court Support), 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members), 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  44. Submissions 6 (Forgetmenot Foundation Inc), 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria); Consultations 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres), 4 (Victim, Witness and Court Support), 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members), 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  45. Submission 38 (Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers); Consultation 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice).

    ↑

  46. Submission 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria); Consultations 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice), 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres), 12 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  47. Consultation 13 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  48. Submission 26 (Hume Riverina Community Legal Service).

    ↑

  49. Submission 15 (Merri Health Victims Assistance Program).

    ↑

  50. Submission 26 (Hume Riverina Community Legal Service); Consultations 17 (Family Violence Diverse Communities and Intersectionality Working Group), 25 (Children’s Court of Victoria).

    ↑

  51. Consultation 11 (Regional Consultation—Victoria Legal Aid—Gippsland).

    ↑

  52. Submissions 18 (cohealth), 27 (Name withheld).

    ↑

  53. Submission 18 (cohealth); Consultation 16 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  54. Consultation 16 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  55. Submission 36 (Name withheld).

    ↑

  56. Consultation 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members).

    ↑

  57. Submission 10 (Eastern Metropolitan Regional Family Violence Partnership).

    ↑

  58. Submission 33 (Eastern Community Legal Centre).

    ↑

  59. Consultation 16 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  60. Submissions 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria), 51 (Law Institute of Victoria); Consultation 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  61. Submissions 26 (Hume Riverina Community Legal Service), 41 (Springvale Monash Legal Service).

    ↑

  62. Submission 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria).

    ↑

  63. Consultations 21 (Victim Support ACT and the Victims of Crime Commissioner, ACT), 22 (Victims Services, NSW and the Commissioner of Victims Rights, NSW).

    ↑

  64. Consultation 22 (Victims Services, NSW and the Commissioner of Victims Rights, NSW).

    ↑

  65. Consultation 21 (Victim Support ACT and the Victims of Crime Commissioner, ACT).

    ↑

  66. Consultation 7 (Family Violence and Advocacy Organisations).

    ↑

  67. Consultation 24 (Community Safety Trustee, Victoria).

    ↑

  68. Submissions 10 (Eastern Metropolitan Regional Family Violence Partnership), 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria); Consultations 6 (Victims’ Advocacy Organisations), 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members), 23 (Community Safety Trustee, Victoria).

    ↑

  69. Submission 14 (Inner Melbourne Community Legal); Consultation 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members).

    ↑

  70. Consultation 8 (Victims’ Representatives—Victims of Crime Consultative Committee).

    ↑

  71. Submissions 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria), 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria).

    ↑

  72. Submission 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria).

    ↑

  73. Submission 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria).

    ↑

  74. Submission 16 (Project Respect).

    ↑

  75. Submission 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria); Consultation 12 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  76. Consultations 15 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Victim Support Agencies), 23 (Community Safety Trustee, Victoria).

    ↑

  77. Consultations 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members), 15 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  78. Submission 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria).

    ↑

  79. Submission 59 (Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, Magistrates’ Court of Victoria and Children’s Court of Victoria).

    ↑

  80. Consultations 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice), 13 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Legal Professionals), 16 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  81. Consultations 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice), 13 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  82. Consultation 16 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  83. Submission 38 (Ryan Carlisle Thomas Lawyers); Consultations 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice), 13 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  84. Submissions 14 (Inner Melbourne Community Legal), 16 (Project Respect), 36 (Name withheld), 37 (safe steps Family Violence Response Centre).

    ↑

  85. Submissions 5 (Anglicare Victoria Victims Assistance Program), 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria), 36 (Name withheld), 37 (safe steps Family Violence Response Centre), 41 (Springvale Monash Legal Service), 43 (knowmore), 51 (Law Institute of Victoria).

    ↑

  86. Submission 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria).

    ↑

  87. Submissions 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria), 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria).

    ↑

  88. Submission 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria).

    ↑

  89. Submission 10 (Eastern Metropolitan Region Regional Family Violence Partnership).

    ↑

  90. Submission 59 (Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, Magistrates’ Court of Victoria and Children’s Court of Victoria).

    ↑

  91. Submissions 10 (Eastern Metropolitan Regional Family Violence Partnership), 31 (Victorian Council of Social Service).

    ↑

  92. Consultation 17 (Family Violence Diverse Communities and Intersectionality Working Group).

    ↑

  93. Submission 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria).

    ↑

  94. Submission 16 (Project Respect).

    ↑

  95. Submission 30 (CASA Forum).

    ↑

  96. Consultations 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members), 17 (Family Violence Diverse Communities and Intersectionality Working Group).

    ↑

  97. Submissions 10 (Eastern Metropolitan Regional Family Violence Partnership), 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria).

    ↑

  98. Consultations 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members), 17 (Family Violence Diverse Communities and Intersectionality Working Group).

    ↑

  99. Submissions 33 (Eastern Community Legal Centre), 36 (Name withheld).

    ↑

  100. Submission 36 (Name withheld).

    ↑

  101. Submission 53 (Magistrates’ Court of Victoria and Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal).

    ↑

  102. Submission 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria).

    ↑

  103. Ibid.

    ↑

  104. Ibid.

    ↑

  105. Submissions 6 (Forgetmenot Foundation Inc), 10 (Eastern Metropolitan Regional Family Violence Partnership), 15 (Merri Health Victims Assistance Program), 26 (Hume Riverina Community Legal Service), 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria), 43 (knowmore), 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria), 51 (Law Institute of Victoria); Consultations 2 (Legal Professionals—Private Practice), 3 (Legal Professionals—Community Legal Centres), 4 (Victim, Witness and Court Support), 7 (Family Violence and Advocacy Organisations), 8 (Victims’ Representatives—Victims of Crime Consultative Committee), 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies), 11 (Regional Consultation with Victoria Legal Aid—Gippsland), 12 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Victim Support Agencies), 13 (Regional Consultation—Mildura Legal Professionals), 16 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Legal Professionals), 25 (Children’s Court of Victoria).

    ↑

  106. Emma Smallwood, Stepping Stones: Legal Barriers to Economic Equality after Family Violence–Report on the Stepping Stones Project (Women’s Legal Service Victoria, 2015) 56.

    ↑

  107. Victims Support Agency, Department of Justice and Regulation (Vic), Counselling for Victims of Crime: An Examination of the Counselling Experiences of 62 Applicants to the Victorian Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal (June 2011) 57–8.

    ↑

  108. Whittlesea Community Legal Service, Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal Capacity Building Project, Discussion Paper (Whittlesea Community Connections, 2011) 32.

    ↑

  109. Betty Chan et al, ‘Support and Compensation: Lessons from Victims of Crime’ (Paper presented at the Actuaries Institute Injury Schemes Seminar, Gold Coast, 10–12 November 2013) 26.

    ↑

  110. Ibid 17.

    ↑

  111. Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (United Kingdom), Criminal Compensation Issues Paper: A Summary of the Themes Raised by Respondents (2017) 4; Jennifer Alvidrez et al, ‘Reduction of State Victim Compensation Disparities in Disadvantaged Crime Victims through Active Outreach and Assistance: A Randomized Trial’ (2008) 98(5) American Journal of Public Health 882, 882; Maarten Kunst et al, ‘Performance Evaluations and Victim Satisfaction with State Compensation for Violent Crime: A Prospective Study’ (2015) 32(19) Journal of Interpersonal Violence 1, 2; David Miers, ‘Compensating Deserving Victims of Violent Crime: The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012’ (2014) 34(2) Legal Studies 242, 277.

    ↑

  112. Geneviève Parent, ‘When Crime Pays: The Politics of Crime, Law, and Victim Compensation in Quebec’ (Paper presented at the Canadian Political Science Association Conference, Toronto, 1–3 June 2006) 11.

    ↑

  113. Victims of Crime Commissioner Act 2015 (Vic) s 13(1).

    ↑

  114. Consultation 21 (Victim Support ACT and the Victims of Crime Commissioner, ACT).

    ↑

  115. Consultation 22 (Victims Services, NSW and the Commissioner of Victims Rights, NSW).

    ↑

  116. Ibid.

    ↑

  117. Njeri Mathis Rutledge, ‘Looking a Gift Horse in the Mouth—The Underutilization of Crime Victim Compensation Funds by Domestic Violence Victims’ (2011) 19 Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy 223, 271.

    ↑

  118. Ibid.

    ↑

  119. Betty Chan et al, ‘Support and Compensation: Lessons from Victims of Crime’ (Paper presented at the Actuaries Institute Injury Schemes Seminar, Gold Coast, 10–12 November 2013) 26.

    ↑

  120. Consultation 21 (Victim Support ACT and the Victims of Crime Commissioner, ACT).

    ↑

  121. The TAC is a Victorian Government-owned organisation set up to pay for treatment and benefits for people injured in transport accidents. See Transport Accident Commission, What We Do (accessed 30 May 2018) <www.tac.vic.gov.au/about-the-tac/our-organisation/what-we-do>.

    ↑

  122. Victoria’s WorkCover Authority, known as WorkSafe Victoria provides compensation to eligible workers injured at work. See WorkSafe Victoria, Annual Report 2017 (2017) 2.

    ↑

  123. See Transport Accident Commission, 2016/17 Annual Report (2017) 15; WorkSafe Victoria, Annual Report 2017 (2017) 8.

    ↑

  124. WorkSafe Victoria, Annual Report 2017 (2017) 8.

    ↑

  125. Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime, The Impact of Victimisation (October 2005) <www.crcvc.ca/docs/victimization.pdf>.

    ↑

  126. Data reporting under the proposed scheme is discussed in Ch 18 of this report.

    ↑

  127. Elaine Wedlock and Jacki Tapley, What Works in Supporting Victims of Crime: A Rapid Evidence Assessment (Victims’ Commissioner and University of Portsmouth, 2016) 13.

    ↑

  128. Consultation 16 (Regional Consultation—Ballarat Legal Professionals).

    ↑

  129. Jo-Anne Wemmers and Katie Cyr, Victims’ Needs within the Context of the Criminal Justice System (University of Montreal, 2006) 71.

    ↑

  130. Betty Chan et al, ‘Support and Compensation: Lessons from Victims of Crime’ (Paper presented at the Actuaries Institute Injury Schemes Seminar, Gold Coast, 10–12 November 2013) 18.

    ↑

  131. Submissions 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria), 51 (Law Institute of Victoria); Consultation 10 (Regional Consultation—Morwell Victim Support Agencies).

    ↑

  132. Submission 51 (Law Institute of Victoria).

    ↑

  133. Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, Annual Report 2016–17 (2017) 9.

    ↑

  134. Ibid 10.

    ↑

  135. Ibid 39.

    ↑

  136. Jennifer Alvidrez et al, ‘Reduction of State Victim Compensation Disparities in Disadvantaged Crime Victims through Active Outreach and Assistance: A Randomized Trial’ (2008) 98(5) American Journal of Public Health 882, 886.

    ↑

  137. For example, Windermere, a community organisation which delivers the Victims Assistance Program in Victoria, is currently co-located in both the Gippsland and Frankston Police stations two days a week. See Windermere, Co-Location Supports Victims of Crime (2016)

    <www.windermere.org.au/news/co-location-supports-victims-of-crime>.

    ↑

  138. Submissions 10 (Eastern Metropolitan Regional Family Violence Partnership), 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria); Consultations 6 (Victims’ Advocacy Organisations), 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members), 23 (Community Safety Trustee, Victoria).

    ↑

  139. Submission 14 (Inner Melbourne Community Legal); Consultation 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members).

    ↑

  140. Submission 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria).

    ↑

  141. Submission 14 (Inner Melbourne Community Legal); Consultation 9 (Domestic Violence Victoria Members).

    ↑

  142. Submissions 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria), 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria).

    ↑

  143. Submissions 14 (Inner Melbourne Community Legal), 16 (Project Respect), 36 (Name witheld), 37 (safe steps Family Violence Response Centre).

    ↑

  144. Submissions 5 (Anglicare Victoria Victims Assistance Program), 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria),

    36 (Name withheld), 37 (safe steps Family Violence Response Centre), 41 (Springvale Monash Legal Service), 43 (knowmore), 51

    (Law Institute of Victoria).

    ↑

  145. Submission 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria).

    ↑

  146. Submissions 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria), 44 (Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention & Legal Service Victoria).

    ↑

  147. Victims Support Agency, Department of Justice and Regulation (Vic), Counselling for Victims of Crime: An Examination of the Counselling Experiences of 62 Applicants to the Victorian Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal (June 2011) 33.

    ↑

  148. Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, Koori VOCAT List Pilot, Review and Recommendations (2010) 24.

    ↑

  149. See generally Department of Justice and Regulation (Vic), Access to Justice Review: Volume 1 Report and Recommendations (Victorian Government, 2016) 131.

    ↑

  150. For example, the use of plain English in government forms in the United Kingdom has reduced errors in completed government forms, resulting in benefits to both government departments and individuals who spent less time on administration. This has been directly linked to significant cost savings for government: Victorian Law Reform Commission, Plain English and the Law (2017) 46.

    ↑

  151. Victims Support Agency, Department of Justice and Regulation (Vic), Guide to Victim Impact Statements, Brochure (2017).

    ↑

  152. Office of Public Prosecutions (Vic), Victim or Family Member Report Form, Brochure (2012).

    ↑

  153. Victorian Law Reform Commission, Plain English and the Law (2017) vii; see also Department of Justice and Regulation (Vic), Access to Justice Review: Volume 1 Report and Recommendations (Victorian Government, 2016) 131.

    ↑

  154. Department of Justice and Regulation (Vic), Access to Justice Review: Volume 1 Report and Recommendations (Victorian Government, 2016) 119.

    ↑

  155. Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, Where to Apply (12 April 2018) <www.vocat.vic.gov.au/how-apply/where-apply>.

    ↑

  156. For example, to improve accessibility, the Commission recommended that there be a single application form for all streams of assistance, including immediate assistance, rather than requiring an applicant to complete separate or multiple application forms.

    ↑

  157. In Chapter 14, the Commission made recommendations in relation to the application form to allow applicants to list multiple family violence incidents or, where abuse is ongoing, list a range of dates over which the violence occurred; describe any cumulative harm suffered, as opposed to harm resulting from any one incident; list one or multiple perpetrators; and describe any harm suffered by their children or other family members.

    ↑

  158. Submissions 14 (Inner Melbourne Community Legal), 16 (Project Respect), 36 (Name withheld), 37 (safe steps Family Violence Response Centre).

    ↑

  159. Submissions 5 (Anglicare Victoria Victims Assistance Program), 29 (Women’s Legal Service Victoria and Domestic Violence Victoria), 36 (Name withheld), 37 (safe steps Family Violence Response Centre), 41 (Springvale Monash Legal Service), 43 (knowmore), 51 (Law Institute of Victoria).

    ↑

16. Interaction with other schemes and refund of awards
Hicaliber © 2024. All rights reserved.