Page 2216 - Week 08 - Thursday, 10 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
That is again a fairly serious extension of the capacity of individuals outside the parameter of the courts to obtain the assets or money of other persons. Again that is a matter that is treated with some considerable caution on the part of this Opposition, but it is not a matter that the Opposition is disposed to argue against. On this occasion we will support this provision because we believe that it is in the interests of marshalling the greatest resources for our Legal Aid Commission. I say, as I said the other day, that legal aid is a vital institution in this community. Those who provide legal aid in the Legal Aid Commission, and perhaps elsewhere - for example, lawyers who do work on contract for the Legal Aid Commission - often work under extremely difficult circumstances, and they deserve our sympathy and our support. I believe, Madam Speaker, that the provisions of this Bill will go some way towards furnishing that support in a tangible way.
I do hope, however, that this Bill is a precursor to greater attention on the part of the ACT Government to the needs of the Legal Aid Commission. In particular, I hope that that greater attention manifests itself in the way of greater financial assistance. I said on the previous occasion that resources in this area are stretched to the limit, and that in an ideal world it should be possible to expand the operation of legal aid to perhaps make it available to those in higher socioeconomic groups than are currently covered by the legal aid principles, or to cover cases which are not presently possible under legal aid guidelines. For example, I understand that certain sorts of personal action against certain people might not be within the parameters that provide assistance under the Legal Aid Commission. As I recall the guidelines when I used to do work for the Legal Advice Bureau, the guidelines are basically that the person has to have either their home or their job or their liberty at risk because of some legal process before they can obtain a grant of aid. The exception to that, I think, is certain Family Court proceedings, but even they are not always open to grants of aid.
So, Madam Speaker, there is a real need for us to find ways of giving better resources levels to legal aid. I would like to think that the budget coming down in a few days' time might do that, but I am not really very hopeful. I hope, Madam Speaker, that we will see attention to matters of this kind brought in the future by this Government. Madam Speaker, I have an amendment to one clause only of this Bill, but I will speak to that when we reach the detail stage.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (4.22), in reply: I thank Mr Humphries for his remarks which, generally speaking, were supportive of the legislation. I think Mr Humphries was essentially right when he said in his opening - although it was a couple of days ago, it is still clear in my mind, Mr Humphries; we pay close attention to what opposition members say on these matters - that essentially this piece of legislation is making the Legal Aid Commission more efficient, and in a sense more businesslike. That is pretty right.
It has been a challenge in the ACT, Madam Speaker, to maintain funding for the Legal Aid Commission. In a lot of other jurisdictions in recent years there have been quite substantial cutbacks to the availability of legal aid funding; but in this Territory we have managed to keep up a substantial effort in public funding of legal aid, as well, of course, as the other source of funding for legal aid, which is interest on the solicitors' trust accounts.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .