Page 2061 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 8 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
commission, in exploiting opportunities for providing resources for these sorts of activities. Without a competent and aggressive financial approach we will find ourselves unable to properly meet the demands which are placed on the system by those who would be its clients.
The Attorney, in his presentation speech, referred to the commission as a non-financial institution. I was puzzled by that reference. I do not know what he meant by "a non-financial institution". If he was saying that it is not a bank or a building society, of course he is right. If he was saying that it is different from, say, private practitioners or private law firms - which are, at least in part, motivated by financial considerations, presumably - then I would say that he may have a point. But in that case it is time to make the Legal Aid Commission more aware of opportunities to recover moneys owing to it. The reason is very simple: Sloppy recovery provisions deprive other applicants for legal aid of resources which might be available to them.
Members are well aware that in recent months enormous pressures have been placed on the commission. In particular, the trial of a number of people in connection with the raid on the Iranian Embassy not very long ago has placed tremendous pressures on the resources of the commission. We all hope that in the course of time those sorts of pressures can be alleviated by a combination of sound management practices assisted by legislation such as this and by greater financial support on the part of the Government.
Madam Speaker, this Bill enacts a number of important changes which, I believe, all assist the efficiency of the Legal Aid Commission. The Bill changes the composition of the governing body of the commission by reducing the number of members from nine to eight - a sensible and streamlining move - and changes the composition and format of the review committees which assess appeals against decisions made in respect of applications. Those changes will all aid a more functional commission and assist the commission in doing away with unnecessary bureaucratic barriers to quick decision making.
Another important change effected by the legislation, and one which caused me to pause and think, is the provision dealing with the capacity of the commission to effectively become a more aggressive financial manager of the resources at its disposal. In particular, the legislation provides for the commission to take recovery steps against people who have made application for money and assistance from the commission. It is possible, under the amendments put forward by the Government, for the commission to issue a charge on the property of an applicant for legal aid to enforce the applicant's contribution to the overall costs of his or her legal action. That kind of requirement for a contribution, particularly a major contribution, and the need for a charge to be made against the property of that applicant would be, I suspect, a relatively rare occurrence. It would not be often that clients who had been granted aid by the commission would need to be put in that position. However, it would sometimes occur, and in those cases there would need to be a fairly careful approach by the commission to the recovery of moneys.
The charge is a charge on the client's land and is lodged with the Registrar of Titles. The idea of that charge is that the commission can, in due course, proceed to exercise a power of sale over the property on which the charge has been placed. The power to sell may be exercised only in certain circumstances: Firstly, where a notice has been given, if that is possible, to the applicant; and,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .