Josh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I commend the member for Blair for his contribution. It was a fine contribution, and I echo many of the sentiments that he made in this place. I rise to speak on this Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2019, and I do so stating from the outset that we, in Labor, wholeheartedly oppose this bill. I also support the member for Isaacs on his second reading amendment to this bill.

It is a reflection on this Morrison government, the emptiness of this Morrison government, that it would put forward a reform such as this. This is a significant reform that is going to affect the lives of thousands and thousands of Australians. This is a dramatic reform and one where stakeholders and experts in the area of family law have not just politely requested but pleaded with the government to stop and reflect on what these changes the government is putting forward will mean to ordinary Australians. Of course, this government, when implementing a reform as significant as this, does not even have the heart to get its members to come up and defend it. Barely any of them stood up to talk about and to defend this reform to the Family Court of Australia. Barely any of them bothered to get up and defend this action by the Attorney-General, because on that side of the House either they don't care enough about the lives of the Australians that they are going to affect by implementing this reform or they don't believe in their own legislation. I don't know which one is sadder, but it is evident that this government is willing to throw out one of the most important institutions in this country, one that tackles some of the most complex and difficult problems that face Australians.

Family problems are complicated. Families are complicated. Australian families are complicated. And it is not right for politicians to insert ourselves into the middle of their families. It is appropriate that, if in the event it's needed, there are channels and courts to deal with it, as the previous member, the member for Blair, outlined. We on this side of the House absolutely appreciate that the system is not perfect. It's not perfect. There are things that are going wrong in the Family Court. There is a huge waiting list. But the way to fix that waiting list is not to amalgamate the Family Court and to take away the expertise and the focus and the experience that comes with having a specific Family Court of Australia and to amalgamate it with the Federal Circuit Court. The way to fix it is to actually resource it properly: provide it with the funding and the resources and maybe even—call me crazy!—appoint a judge once or twice. But the Attorney-General seems to be absolutely stubborn in his approach to this court. He has refrained and refused to support the court and to give it the resources and infrastructure and the personnel and appointees that it so desperately needs.

Here's some history: those opposite do not even bother to speak on their own legislation, which is stock standard in this place; there are not many bills that this government introduces that government MPs bother to stand up on. But, for one as important as this, you'd have thought at least some of them would have stood up and acknowledged the significance and maybe even defended the reforms, but that seems to be a step too far for the members opposite. So many reforms—so many great reforms—in this country were not implemented by a lethargic and stagnant government like this; they were implemented by a Labor government keen not to waste their time in office and keen to implement the reforms required to help make Australian lives and Australian livelihoods better. So, in 1974, when the Whitlam government introduced the Family Law Act, it was debated in this place. It was debated, and almost half of the members of this place and in the other place down the road spoke on this bill. They spent 28 sitting hours debating the bill. It wasn't a reform that was ignored. They didn't throw in one or two MPs and then sit down. The number of Australians affected by this court was reflected by the number of MPs willing to stand up and say why it was important. But, for the life of me, I'm yet to hear one single reason why this government thinks this idea is a worthy one.

Going on this idea of acknowledging the fact that there is backlog that needs to be addressed, this government didn't listen to the Australian Law Reform Commission. In 2019, the Australian Law Reform Commission did a comprehensive report on the family law system. They made 60 recommendations. One of the key recommendations and key findings was:

… the family law system has been deprived of resources to such an extent that it cannot deliver the quality of justice expected of a country like Australia, and to whose family law system other countries once looked and tried to emulate.

In other words, the Australian Law Reform Commission pointed out the most obvious problem with the Family Court. It is not that there isn't some amalgamation required or some watering down of the specialisation of the judges and of the appointees in the court; it's the fact that the court has been neglected, and it has been neglected by consecutive governments—the Abbott government, the Turnbull government and now the Morrison government.

Instead of listening to the Law Reform Commission's report, what this government did was commission PwC to put forward a different proposal. PwC basically had a chik-chak look at it over six weeks, came back and put forward these recommendations. But it flies in the face of experts, former judges, the Law Reform Commission and the general public. Everyone is saying to the government, 'Please don't do this.' This is going to hurt Australian families. This is going to impact on ordinary Australians' access to a court that they need to sort out internal family disputes. This is going to hurt ordinary Australians who have everyday problems in their lives and in their families. Things go wrong in families, and that's devastating, but it's also important that people have the mechanisms through which to move on. The dilution of this court is going to affect those families who are seeking that avenue to improve, and to get on with, their lives.

So we say clearly to this government: you don't need to do this. Making it harder for Australians to access the Family Court is not a legacy that you're going to look back on and be proud of. You're not going to be proud to look back and say: 'Instead of listening to experts and listening to those who specialise in, and spend their days and lives dedicated to, the family law system in Australia, we just did our own thing, and nobody even bothered to turn up and defend it. We just rushed through these changes to the Family Court of Australia. Quite frankly, none of our members care enough to bother to come into this place and talk about them, but we're just going to do it anyway.' You don't need to do it. Certainly, I would say to those in the other place that you don't need to pass this bill. This bill does not need to be passed.

The Family Court does tend to deal with those from vulnerable and lower socioeconomic backgrounds. Sadly, because of the extra stresses on those families, they find themselves before the Family Court at a higher rate. To amalgamate this court—to dilute it and to merge it—is to make it more difficult for those families and especially for those kids, and it will reduce the standard of hearings. The government does not need to do that.

I spoke of all of those who have opposed this legislation. One of the latest thorough investigations into this was done in the Australian Senate, and, of course, the Labor senators issued a dissenting report. One of the things they said was that this bit of reform by the government has been almost universally condemned, that the number of submissions by experts outlining the harm that this potential merger would do was immense and that, in contrast, there was no evidence that the reforms before us today are actually going to fix the issues that the Family Court have.

After reducing the resources and failing to appoint judges, this government has decided to introduce the legislation that is before the House today. What a good government would do is to stand in this place and say: 'Yes, there are issues in the Family Court and we haven't given it the resources that it needs, but we're keen to get this right. We're keen to make sure that Australian kids and Australian families have the resources to deal with the complex family needs of Australians.' A good government would get up in this place and say: 'Here are the ways in which we're going to make this better and fairer for Australians. Here are the ways that we're going to improve it and consult and work with those in the industry and those who are experts in this. What we're going to do is make sure that our duties and the duty of the Attorney-General, the highest law officer in the land, are not neglected. We will make sure that for every vacancy we are going to hunt down the best candidates so that the court is filled with competent and dedicated people to make this work.' That's what a good government would do. That's what the reforms that are needed would look like. Instead, like the typical Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government, they come in this place and waste government. They waste what good government could be. They are content on that side of the House with putting forward legislation that is not, at its heart, going to improve the lives of Australians. In their stubbornness against the experts, they are using government to ram through bills that this country does not need.

I wonder how many people on that side of the House are entirely comfortable with the Attorney-General and his approach of not funding the Family Court, not investing in the future of the court, not resourcing it adequately, ignoring the experts and ignoring the retired judges who have come out of retirement in order to make their point—rather, the Attorney-General's approach is to go off a short review conducted by a large accounting firm. We actually don't know, because, as with so many bills in this place, the government MPs have not even bothered to turn up to this debate and defend this reform, which is a real tragedy given the significance of it, the harm it's going do to Australian families and the impact it's going to have on Australian lives. We oppose this bill and we support the second reading amendment put forward by the member for Isaacs.

See this speech in context