Page 3268 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 17 September 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
some other reason, if the hearing time is vacated for some other reason, another matter can be brought on.
For example, we had a matter last month where a judge of the court was due to hear an eight-week murder trial involving two individuals. Those individuals changed their plea to guilty on the day of the hearing, therefore effectively vacating eight weeks of that judge’s time. As a result of the case management system, that judge is able to reallocate time and bring forward other matters and have them heard in a timely way.
This is what case management is all about. This is what more efficient practices in the court are all about. This is what improving access to justice is all about. I am very pleased to confirm that we have almost halved the waiting time in the last 12 months for matters being heard in the Supreme Court, and we will continue to work with the court to further improve on those excellent results.
MADAM SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Mr Hanson.
MR HANSON: Attorney-General, do you agree with the former chief justice that a fifth Supreme Court judge is required?
MR CORBELL: No, the government does not agree. That will be of no surprise to those opposite or to the broader legal community. At this point in time we do not believe that a fifth resident judge is required. These figures demonstrate very clearly why that is the case. Through a process of better case management you can cut waiting times and improve the efficiency of the court while still utilising the same resources of the court. I would have thought those opposite would have been all for a more efficient court system that uses taxpayers’ money wisely and efficiently. I am very pleased that the government is delivering those results for the community.
MADAM SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Mr Hanson.
MR HANSON: Attorney-General, how did such long waiting times develop in the Supreme Court in the first place?
MR CORBELL: There are a range of factors for that, and those include the lack of a docket system and case management system, rules that needed to be improved and updated, changes to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court so that other matters were dealt with in the lower courts such as the Magistrates Court where appropriate and, regrettably, vacancies created in the resident judges bench because of retirement and also, in one instance, an unanticipated and tragic loss to the court. So all of these were factors that contributed to the build-up in the backlog. No one factor is to blame, alone, but they all contribute.
The government has worked systematically and collaboratively with the court to improve the circumstances of the court and its waiting times. As a result, we have cut waiting times in the court by almost half in the last 12 months. And it is all directly a result of collaboration between the executive and the courts and, most importantly, the introduction of a docket system and the blitz to put the court in a much better place to manage its workload moving forward.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video