Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Hansard source

Labor will always champion legislation that makes the family law system fairer. The amendments in the Family Law Amendment (Western Australia De Facto Superannuation Splitting and Bankruptcy) Bill 2019 will make the system fairer for de facto couples in Western Australia. Currently, unlike in other states and territories, superannuation cannot be split as part of a property settlement between de facto couples in Western Australia. Instead, courts in Western Australia are required to assess other assets that may be split between the parties and make adjustments in favour of the party with less superannuation. The amendments in schedule 1 address this anomaly by ensuring that de facto couples in Western Australia are treated the same as de facto couples in other jurisdictions in relation to superannuation splitting in family law matters.

The amendments in schedule 2 of the bill will address a further anomaly in the family law system, one that causes further unfairness to de facto couples in Western Australia. Where either or both parties to a family law dispute involving a de facto couple are also involved in bankruptcy proceedings, de facto couples in Western Australia are currently forced to resolve those matters through separate proceedings in different courts. Family law proceedings are resolved in the Family Court of Western Australia. Bankruptcy proceedings are resolved in the Federal Court or the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Schedule 2 would address that inconsistency by extending the federal bankruptcy jurisdiction to the Family Court of Western Australia, so that bankruptcy and family law matters involving de facto couples can be heard concurrently in a single court.

As the Attorney-General is aware, these changes are uncontroversial and long overdue. But, given the Morrison government's record of never delivering on its announcements, I suppose we should be grateful that these reforms are being delivered at all. So I do not propose to dwell on the fact that it has been almost three years since the Attorney-General committed the government to these measures and almost one year since the bill was introduced into the parliament. Perhaps some of my colleagues will have more to say about that.

Instead, I'd like to talk very briefly about the problem of delay in a related context, and that is delay in the context of the family law system as a whole. As I stand here today, it is taking about 1½ years, on average, from the time a family law matter is filed in the Family Court or Federal Circuit Court to the date of a trial commencing. That's the average waiting time. Some families are waiting up to four years. And, of course, that's just to get to trial. Once a trial has concluded, litigants then have to wait many months for the courts to hand down their judgements, and even matters that do not ultimately proceed to trial are taking many, many months to resolve. You do not have to be a family lawyer to work out why. Just last week, we heard that one Federal Circuit Court judge is managing 659 cases at the same time, and that, on average, judges at that court have 337 matters each on their dockets. These extraordinary workloads inevitably result in delays, and those delays harm Australian men, Australian women and Australian children—they harm Australian families.

This problem is not new, but it is a problem that has become considerably worse over time, and that is because the government's response to the problem of delays in the family law system has been to do everything it can to delay taking action. For years, the Liberal government's management of the crisis in the family law system has followed the same pattern. First, in response to political pressure, the government calls a press conference to announce that it will be establishing an inquiry to come up with solutions to fix the family law system. Second, the government says it can't possibly do anything to fix the problems in the family law system while the matter is being inquired into. Third, when the inquiry finally reports, the government ignores the inquiry's recommendations. Then, when faced with renewed political pressure, the government calls another press conference, establishes another inquiry into the family law system—and so it goes on.

This pattern suits the government's political purposes, but it has been devastating for Australian families because, while the government has dithered, the very real problems in the family law system have continued to fester. And, if the Morrison government gets its way, those problems are about to get a whole lot worse very quickly, because, after the coalition has spent the last seven years in government asking family law experts to conduct inquiry after inquiry, the only major reform to the family law system that the coalition has shown any interest in is the Attorney-General's reckless proposal to abolish the Family Court by merging it with the Federal Circuit Court. That proposal is based on—wait for it—a six-week desktop review by two accountants from PwC. That is how seriously the Morrison government takes the job of reforming the family law system. The Morrison government has said: 'Forget about what the experts have told us. None of them has anything to teach us. Let's ask two accountants what they think we should do about the family law system and follow their advice.' The Attorney-General's arrogant proposal to abolish the Family Court as a specialist, standalone Family Court is as irresponsible as it is ill informed, and Labor will oppose it. There's much more that I could say about this bill and about the family law system more generally, but I'm conscious that a number of my colleagues from Western Australia who have long advocated for the reforms in this bill would like to say a few words. I move:

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1) notes that:

(a) Labor has always supported, and will always support, amendments to make the family law system fairer for all Australians;

(b) the effect of the amendments in this bill would be to make the system fairer for de facto couples in Western Australia;

(c) despite the bill having bipartisan support, it has taken almost a year for the Government to bring this bill on for debate; and

(2) is of the view that:

(a) the delay in bringing this bill on for debate is emblematic of the Coalition Government's neglect of the family law system in Australia;

(b) after doing so much to undermine the family law system for seven years, the Government should make fixing the family law system a priority; and

(c) to that end, the Government should not proceed with its reckless proposal to abolish the Family Court of Australia by merging it with the Federal Circuit Court".

See this speech in context