Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

In speaking to this motion to take note of answers I rise to defend the freedom of speech of community legal centres, a sector in our community that is performing very valuable work on behalf of the vulnerable in our society. I do not need to remind honourable senators that approximately 250,000 people every year help this sector's campaigns for reform on a range of issues, including domestic violence, child abuse and other issues. It was reported recently, and it prompted the question to the Attorney-General, that the sector is worried about gag clauses being contained in agreements which are being developed between federal and state governments.

Whilst the Attorney-General in his response has denied that these are in fact gag clauses, he has confirmed in his response that the funding that is going to be provided to the CLCs is not to be used for advocacy, and he indicated that community legal centres could pursue 'any causes they like', in his words. But in his words the resources are most urgently needed elsewhere, other than in the field of advocacy. This is I think a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of community legal centres and the struggle for justice which has taken place in this country over a number of decades in which our CLCs have been at the forefront. The extensive experience of these organisations at the very front line of service delivery means that they are often able to provide unique insights and contributions to policy development in their areas of expertise. And as organisations are in close contact with disadvantaged Australians through public advocacy they provide another important avenue to justice by giving a voice to those who are often less able to advocate for themselves.

Lawyers at community legal centres are in a unique position to learn through real-world experience what is working and what is not in important areas such as consumer protection law, prohibitions on predatory lending practices, and laws to protect women and children against domestic violence. I know that the Attorney-General has an interest in those areas, so it is somewhat concerning that this valuable work is being curtailed by the funding approach of the Commonwealth.

But now of course in addition to the brutal funding cuts to legal services that this government has imposed since coming to office the Abbott government has directed that community legal centres must not spend Commonwealth funds on advocacy or law reform work. As I have indicated, I believe that this is a misconception of the role of CLCs which has occurred over a number of decades, in three particular areas. Firstly, Senator Brandis appears to draw a peculiar distinction between the needs of individual clients and the needs of the broader community. So, CLCs are self-evidently intended to serve their communities as a whole. And there are longstanding relationships with other organisations and they have the understanding to pursue issues on behalf of their client base. Secondly, Senator Brandis's argument that funding for advocacy necessarily comes at the expense of so-called actual clients is in my view deeply misconceived. And of course it could be said that we are not talking about a zero-sum game in this area. Casework and advocacy are mutually reinforcing. The cumulative experience that CLCs gain in their casework informs their advocacy. CLCs become specialists in the types of legal problems that afflict their clients and their communities. And the third argument I would put is that the government has failed to understand that CLCs are not just a particular sort of charity intended to provide free legal advice or representation. Those who founded the CLC movement saw systemic injustice in Australian law and society, and they intended to change that system. The legal assistance sector as a whole will be the poorer if we allow them to be restricted the limited purpose. CLCs have made a contribution to law reform disproportionate to their modest size and funding and the expert advocacy of community lawyers has indisputably made our legal system fairer. (Time expired)