Page 3313 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 18 September 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Certainly, Mr Speaker, because of the complexity and variety of matters addressed by Mr Curtis, the proposals have to be formulated in stages. I trust that with further understanding of what we are about we can put down the idea that Collaery is rushing to judgment on issues, that Collaery is hell-bent on a non-consultative process or that he is hell-bent on replicating New Zealand in the ACT. If we can put down those things which I accept are legitimate political jousts put at the Government, we can move on to see that we have the best court system in this city state and, as a result, in this country.
Mr Speaker, once the Government has resolved its position on a number of particular issues we will be in a position to go out and tell the community what our viewpoints are; but, indeed, anyone tackling Mr Curtis' report could be forgiven for having some divergence of views on some of the singular issues he tackles. I look forward to the Community Law Reform Committee being a sounding board on those issues.
So, finally, Mr Speaker, I emphasise that the Government is committed to the widest possible consultation on this issue. If the Opposition could give us time to achieve the first stage, which is an orderly contribution from the profession, from the judges and the magistrates, from the AAT and from the Credit Tribunal, with knowledge of their contribution and with their assistance we will move to the community consultative stage.
Clearly, Mr Speaker, that is what I have been discussing in the last few weeks - how all of the people affected should set the timetable for these proposed reforms and how we should eventually tackle proposals to have some unification for economic and social reasons and in order to preserve the excellence of the law.
MRS GRASSBY (3.49): We in the Labor Party do not see any benefit in abolishing magistrates and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Magistrates are the most accessible level of justice. I understand this is said to be so by the Law Society in the ACT and I cannot see why we need to change it. Small Claims Courts designed for lay persons are ideal for conducting matters. Overall informal settings in courts are comfortable for people to be in.
Turning magistrates into judges puts this all at risk and there is no gain to anybody. Going to court for the first time can be one of the most frightening things that can happen to you, particularly if you are facing a judge. If your first language is English and you have been born in this country and you do understand the legal system it is bad enough, but if your first language is not English and you go into one of these courts it is quite frightening.
I had my very first experience in a court when I had to go to the Equity Court and I will never forget it. We employed a QC because we were told this was the best way to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .