Page 1144 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 20 March 2013

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


What is interesting in having those extensive consultations that I have had with a range of stakeholders over time is that there are a range of different views on why the delays exist in the ACT’s court system and therefore an equally diverse range of what the possible solutions are. Nobody sees that there is a silver bullet in this issue. As I said, there is a range of theories, some around cultural practices in various parts of the legal system here in the ACT, some about capacity. There are different views.

We do know—Mr Corbell has picked this up in his amendment—that in recent times there have been a range of initiatives for reforms to the justice system in the ACT. The Greens supported those reforms through the course of the last Assembly. With the change in the jurisdiction of the Magistrates Court, sending significantly more matters there, we see a much speedier resolution of issues and a capacity to deal with those issues in a timely manner. The anecdotal discussions I have had with people recently suggest that that change is now just starting to really come through. We are seeing many more cases go to the Magistrates Court that previously would have gone to the Supreme Court. That, in my mind, is an example of one area where the reforms that have been made are now starting to have effect.

In the last Assembly we made amendments to the bail process where we provided the capacity for people who were seeking bail and had been denied it in the first instance to come back to the Magistrates Court to seek bail again. Often at the first instance people do not have the necessary information to make their case, but perhaps a few days later, once they have got better organised and have sought out their legal representation, they may make a better case as to why they should be granted bail. That is instead of people having to go back to the Supreme Court for their second attempt at bail. Again, that was a sensible reform that keeps matters that really should not be in the Supreme Court out of the Supreme Court.

There are a number of other matters that Mr Corbell has listed in his amendment, but I think each of those has potential. To my mind there are some parallels here with the corrections portfolio. As the corrections minister, since I have come into the portfolio, I have heard from various supporters, including in this chamber, calls for reforms and immediate changes in the prison. However, the context in the ACT is that over the last 18 months there have been a series of reviews, recommendations and reforms at the AMC as well as a new regime of senior staff who have taken up roles in Corrective Services. In the case of corrections, I am of the view that we need to keep moving forward with those various reforms, but also that we need a bit of time for them to come into full effect so that we can assess whether we made progress against those previous criticisms and then where there may be areas where we need to make further improvement.

I think we have a similar situation with the justice system in the ACT. A number of important reforms have now been made that I think will help redistribute the workload in the court system and better utilise the Magistrates Court, particularly: matters that should not end up in the Supreme Court now will go to the Magistrates Court, where they will get dealt with in a more timely manner.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video