Page 1122 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 20 March 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
consider the appropriate system of courts for the ACT. To have the Curtis report as a discussion paper allows a starting point to consider that appropriate system. The summary of Curtis' proposals prepared by the Government Law Office as an internal working document, I am sure, has also assisted in developing comment. I understand that, while the summary of Curtis' proposals does not purport to replace or modify the Curtis report in any way, it was made available for comment with the Curtis report. While I understand that the submissions closing date has now passed, I await with interest a briefing on the comment received, including not only the number of submissions but, more importantly, the comment on those recommendations.
There is, of course, no doubt that such features as improved administrative procedures and the provision of common services between the courts could be seen as a distinct advantage. Common services, such as library and computer systems, and common statistical data collection and workload measurement could, I would have thought, have also been considered an advantage. Concerning the recommendation of proposed new accommodation for the courts, while I concede that our current accommodation is certainly inadequate and somewhat fragmented, it is my view that it could hardly be considered as a high priority.
Many of us are aware that the Northern Territory is only now just constructing a new court building. We are aware of the number of years that the Northern Territory has had self-government. Members, of course, are aware that the Northern Territory celebrated 10 years of self-government in 1988. That building is due to open later this year. While the Federal Government guaranteed the loan it is, in fact, being paid for by the Northern Territory Government. So, at this point in time, I think it is very important to realise just where that funding would be coming from, because the Federal Government has not indicated that they would be forthcoming with that funding.
As I mentioned at the beginning of my remarks, this report can serve a useful purpose as a discussion paper. However, I would hope that full and proper consideration is given in weighing up that input. I share the Minister's view that he stated in the house last September, namely:
... the basic need is for a system of justice which can deliver effective justice without imposing undue financial demands on its principal users, the members of the general public.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .