Page 1995 - Week 07 - Thursday, 17 June 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I want to touch on some of the issues that we considered in respect of both those matters. There are some recommendations dealing with both those matters which, on an interim basis at least, should be dealt with, I believe, by the Government and by the Assembly. The legal profession did not come in for universal criticism in the course of this inquiry. Organisations such as the Legal Aid Commission, for example, were quick to point out that many lawyers in the ACT show commendable traits of public service and a desire to make law and justice accessible to citizens.
The image of lawyers as being universally grasping was perhaps reflected in some submissions but also rejected in others. But it is not to be doubted that the structures of our legal system and of our court system are necessarily costly. The relationship between lawyers and other lawyers - for example, between solicitors and barristers - and the relationship between lawyers and the public are deserving of much greater scrutiny. There is a need for us to examine very carefully the processes whereby those relationships are governed and, in particular, the costs that are inherent in those relationships and the way in which fees and charges are levied in terms of those relationships.
There are many features which might contribute to the cost of the system. For example, the universal practice in our system of senior counsel, queen's counsel, being briefed by junior counsel when they appear in courts contributes to the cost of the system. Similarly, the practice of the Bar in this town and elsewhere that they receive briefs only from solicitors, rather than from ordinary members of the public, might also be said to contribute to cost.
Therefore, Madam Speaker, a number of issues have had to be examined and will have to be examined in the course of that inquiry, but one issue particularly stood out and deserved strong attention. That was the continuing position of queen's counsel in our legal system. The committee was aware that in other jurisdictions that institution is under serious question and that in some places governments have made the decision not to proceed with the appointment of any further queen's counsel. It was the recommendation of this committee, Madam Speaker, that until the Legal Affairs Committee has had the opportunity to complete its inquiry into the legal profession in the ACT the Government should not appoint any further queen's counsel. It may be at the end of that time that the committee sees no problem with the continuing practice of such appointments, but there are certainly many questions which would need to be answered before a recommendation of that kind came forward. I believe, therefore, that it is appropriate for the Government not to proceed to make any further appointments.
Another issue is the factors which contribute to the high cost of lawyers, in particular the role of the corporate sector and government in purchasing legal services. In many respects, the capacity of businesses and government, particularly larger businesses and government, to purchase legal services at high prices contributes in large part to the heavy price paid by ordinary citizens when they front a lawyer and seek to obtain services of a similar nature. The committee was of the view that two things should be done in respect of this, again pending its inquiry into the legal profession. One is that the ACT Government should approach the Commonwealth Government with a view to reviewing the right of businesses to claim business litigation costs as a tax deduction. This is obviously
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .