Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I speak today in support of the Courts Administration Legislation Amendment Bill 2015. Essentially, the bill purports to streamline the functions of the Federal Court, the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court, and to provide for a single administrative entity supporting shared court management responsibilities and processes amongst those federal courts. This shared approach should be beneficial in supporting a proper functioning and better resourced court system, compared to the existing system, which seems to be labouring under the weight of matters it has before it. That is why we do support the passage of this bill.

The 2012 Strategic Review of Small and Medium Agencies in the Attorney-General's Portfolio considered that there was merit in shared administration arrangements. This was echoed in the 2014 National Commission of Audit report Towards responsible government. The National Commission of Audit report certainly considered the merit in shared administrative arrangements for the courts and stated:

It would be possible to merge the Federal Court of Australia with the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court of Australia. This would reduce administrative costs and provide additional opportunities to share facilities and streamline back-office functions to achieve more efficient administration of justice.

The necessity for such savings measures through shared court management, I think, is clearly obvious, particularly when we consider, in my own local patch, the Federal Circuit Court located in Parramatta. As it stands today, I know there are significant problems. I know how under-resourced the court system is there. In the last budget, the Family Court was projected to have over $44 million of operating losses.

These are issues with the administration of justice. It is one of the central aspects of our democracy that everyone is entitled to be equal before the law but, more importantly, everyone is entitled to receive justice before our courts. This is an attempt to ensure greater efficiencies through shared management in respect of our federal court structures. The corporate services would be managed by a Federal Court chief executive officer and principal registrar. The holder of that position would act as the CEO. This would allow for the streamlining of existing services to place the courts on a sustainable funding footing. I note that the proposed amendments to the Federal Court of Australia Act would also ensure that there would be a mechanism put in place to provide a form of constraint on the way in which funds are spent by the CEO.

There is no question that we are satisfied with this legislation and the way it ensures the ongoing independence and integrity of our federal court system and also the jurisdictional nature of each of those three courts. The Federal Circuit Court has certainly undergone various changes in recent years, since being renamed, allowing the court to practise within concurrent jurisdictions of both the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Court. The change was also aimed at creating a faster, simpler and more accessible justice system. This has allowed the Federal Circuit Court to include larger volumes of cases and expand its accessibility to other areas of the law. Taking those changes into account, it is nevertheless vital to ensure that each case is being dealt with in a timely manner and that individuals are assured of due process before the law. Such justice and timely consideration of matters must be the objective under any proposed streamlined structure.

As it stands today, the Federal Circuit Court has Family Court matters as its highest workload. As I understand, in 2015 that comprised about 91 per cent of its workload. One of the main issues of the everyday workings of the Federal Circuit Court is the large array of domestic violence cases, as well as cases being referred from the Magellan registrar, a case management system in the Family Court of Australia process to improve the outcomes particularly for vulnerable children and their families. This is an interagency approach created to combat court processing times for serious cases involving allegations of sexual or serious physical abuse. The Magellan registrar has reduced court time for serious matters involving abuse and has allowed for serious cases to be allocated unlimited resources, specialist welfare workers and the appointment of independent children's lawyers.

One of the criticisms as it stands today is the lack of replacement judges in the Federal Circuit Court for judges who have retired or been relocated. This has significantly impeded the court's ability to function in a timely manner, particularly given its heavy workload. An understaffed court system and the possibility, in respect of Parramatta, of the closure of the registry contravene the very reason for the implementation of programs such as the Magellan registrar, which exists to combat the problem of a backlog of cases. Therefore, this desperately requires closer attention. Recent reports have indicated that the Federal Circuit Court was able to finalise only 75 per cent of its applications in 2014-15, which fell somewhat short of the target of finalising 90 per cent of its matters. A former Federal Circuit Court judge, former Justice Coakes, noted:

… (cases involve) dysfunctional families and children at risk from dysfunctional parents because of drug abuse, alcohol abuse, domestic violence in all its forms and mental illness.

That represents a real danger to the children. Until a case can be heard and finalised by a judge, those risks are continuing.

Therefore, it is vital to ensure that matters are run efficiently and in a timely manner and that justice is not delayed in the processing of matters in those courts.

I acknowledge the government's recent injection of $100 million to combat domestic violence. I certainly supported that initiative to some extent. Many would say that is not enough, because domestic violence is an epidemic in many of our communities, but I believe it is important that we continue along that path and ensure the maintenance of our judicial officers and court systems to be able to give justice and preside over matters as serious as domestic violence. It is critically important that these caseloads be handled as quickly as possible and orders made, particularly where protecting abused partners, where child protection matters are involved, and where recovery orders and other urgent applications are necessary.

I also acknowledge what is certainly considered a failing of the government when it comes to the appointment of new judges to vacancies. We are seeing more and more that, in various of our courts, vacancies are being left unfilled. This is certainly a cause of discontent amongst many of the legal profession due to the large volume of matters, the delays experienced and the frustration for both clients and litigators. I have received various pieces of correspondence from members of the legal profession requesting assistance in relation to this matter. If judges are not appointed to the Federal Circuit Court to replace retiring judges in a timely way, we could possibly see the shutting down of various registries. The courts are already understaffed and under-resourced and lack efficiency. That is why this bill is before the House today. But the last thing we want to see is a registry, such as the Parramatta registry, closed down, leaving the work to the Sydney based registry.

When it comes to justice, I think working together to ensure that the courts are appropriately funded and making certain that the ratio of court staff and judges is consistent with the workload is a good thing and would ensure that the intended outcome of the smooth and efficient running of our court systems is maintained. The ability of the community to access our court systems is fundamental to the system of Australian justice. It is fundamental, particularly in respect of matters that require urgent attention or litigation, particularly where litigation is necessary to protect the vulnerable. I support this bill.

See this speech in context