Page 4618 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 19 October 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the community legal centres. Put simply, the Greens disagree and, as I understand it, the Canberra Liberals disagree with that too.
There is good will and energy in the community legal centres and the private lawyers who donate their time. The Greens believe it is part of the role of government to support and harness this to the highest extent possible. The attorney has also said that community legal centre accommodation is a matter for the commonwealth. I partly agree that the commonwealth may have a role to fund a proportion of the cost or play some other part, but that is something for the feasibility study to look into in detail. The important point, however, is that the ACT government also must have a role.
Finally, the attorney has also said that some improvements have been made to Havelock House and that the Women’s Legal Centre have been provided with additional accommodation at north Lyneham. These are both statements of fact which we acknowledge and have noted in the text of the motion. However, we do not believe that the government should stop there, because it remains a fact that volunteer lawyers offering their time pro bono are still being turned away. I note also that, for example, I think it has taken in the region of three months to get the telephone and internet connected at the facility at north Lyneham since they moved in. It is certainly not ideal. We now see a small staff split over two sites, and because some parts of the Women’s Legal Centre have been moved to north Lyneham some administrative costs are duplicated across their two venues at Havelock and north Lyneham. For a centre operating on limited funding, that kind of duplication is best avoided and we are hopeful this will not be a long-term solution.
In conclusion, a feasibility study into a CLC hub is very important and I am pleased the Assembly is having this debate today. My feeling very much is that this is an issue of opportunity. It is about acknowledging that we have a tremendous service being provided that fills a gap that clearly is there in our community. We have the capacity to increase that service through a bit of, perhaps, imagination, a bit of careful thinking and certainly a bit of commitment to finding the best possible way to assist these community organisations to ramp up their efforts and, I guess, unleash their full potential.
My intention in moving this motion is to ensure that we have some focus, that we actually get the work done so that we can then come back to this place and further discuss what the solutions might be. Certainly in earlier discussions the attorney has said that the government should not have to provide the accommodation. But I think the first step we need to take here is to work out what the options are and then we can have a debate about whether there is a role for government or not. Right now we are not delivering the best possible service we can, Canberrans are falling between the gaps in the legal system and I think it is warranted for this Assembly and for the government to make some focused and endeavoured steps to address those problems. I commend the motion to the Assembly.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment and Sustainable Development, Minister for Territory and Municipal Services and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (11.08): The government is committed to improving access to justice, and community legal centres play an important role in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video