Page 1602 - Week 06 - Thursday, 3 May 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR SPEAKER: Before the next question I would like to advise members of the opposition that the Chief Minister will take questions on behalf of Mr Humphries.
ACT Court System
MR WOOD: I direct a question to the Attorney-General. Will he impose a realistic timetable for the ACT law reform committee's reference on the future structure of the ACT courts? Surely the Attorney is not serious in suggesting that we must wait until 1995 to see court restructuring.
MR COLLAERY: I thank Mr Wood for the question. Looking at interstate experience of court restructuring proposals and the time that was spent in bringing those forward, and even looking at the length of time that decisions on whether to proceed with committal structures would take in New South Wales, I formed the view that if we go to an all-out Law Reform Commission reference and involve the Australian Law Reform Commission in it there would be at least, in my view, five years' work in the matter. That is my personal view, and I inform the house that that is purely a personal view.
I am currently considering what options we have to better the situation of the magistracy. The very real pressure on this Government and any future government will be the Magistrates Court. As Mr Wood knows, 95 per cent of justice is dispensed in the Magistrates Court of the Territory. It has been chronically overworked.
There are a whole number of structural issues. For example, it is years since New South Wales developed common pleading forms and common documentary forms between court structures, but still in the ACT the profession files numerous pieces of paper in different jurisdictions. They have the same filing forms in the Supreme Court, District Court and so on in New South Wales. They are major administrative procedural issues to be faced in any law reform process. It is not a question of a structure of a court; it is a question of the procedures, the practice directions and all those other matters. Massive tomes of documents have to be gone through. It is a very complex affair.
My view is that I will take considered advice on how we should proceed on court reform in the ACT in the future. It is only a few days since the proposal that we have a public consultative process was knocked on the head, regrettably, with the support of the Labor Party in this Territory. It was my very great hope, as the writing shows, that we have a public consultative process.
Mr Speaker, I draw the attention of all in the house to our media release of 19 April 1990 which said:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .