Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

) ( ): In my travels, due to my shadow responsibilities, I have met with family lawyers and barristers from Cairns to Adelaide and everywhere in between. Many family lawyers are complaining of these increasing delays in the Family Court that I touched on in my earlier question. In fact, Family Court judges have apologised to litigants in their judgements because of these delays. I read from Justice Forrest where he says: 'My judgment in this matter has been reserved for almost a year. I attribute that to the obligation to hear and determine so many other matters in this court in that time. I regret any distress the delay in delivering the judgment may have caused to the parties additional to that which they would likely already be experiencing being involved in parenting proceedings in this court.'

Obviously delay causes stress, heartache and perhaps even damage to children. I note that tomorrow the Honourable Rob McClelland, the former Attorney-General, will commence his work with the Family Court, 580 days after the vacancy was created in Sydney. I am a big supporter of the Honourable Rob McClelland. I wish him well in his new endeavours. But I am giving you the opportunity to respond to my earlier question about when there will be a replacement to the vacancy in Brisbane. The Chief Justice of the Family Court, in Family Court Bulletin issue 13, in December 2013, said that there was a full complement of the Family Court judges and that a full complement of judges would enable the court to work effectively and efficiently. Any gap means that there is greater delay. There has not been that full complement for a long time. As I said, we wish of Rob McClelland well tomorrow, but 580 days is an incredible time for an Attorney-General not to make a decision. I am sure that he is not waiting for someone in Brisbane. I am sure he will be able to find someone from the distinguished ranks in Brisbane to fill that vacancy. But I have a couple of questions. Has there been a decrease in the final and interim orders that was finalised in the Family Court last financial year? Has the workload, reflected by the amount of applications filed, increased? What percentage of litigants appearing in the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court are unrepresented? As I am sure the minister will know, matters where the parties are unrepresented can take longer, be more complicated and involve extra guidance provided from the bench. What percentage of litigants appearing in the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court are legally aided? Is the percentage of unrepresented litigants who appear in the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Courts increasing? What percentage of cases that come before the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court involve children? What percentage of the cases that come before the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court involve family violence? As I touched on earlier, that combination of family violence and children means that delay can compound decisions and the implications of decisions. How many judges sit on the Family Court of Australia? Has the workload of the of the Family Court been increasing over recent years? If a judge retires and then is not replaced, what is the impact on the court's capacity to hear cases in a timely manner and to give timely directions?

I take you back to your earlier comments, Minister, where you said there was an injection of money such that it would put the courts on a sustainable footing. But it is my understanding that the fee increases that will flow—this so-called divorce tax, as written up in the media—will actually go back into consolidated revenue, not to services in the Family Court. So the people who are divorcing and the people who are trying to amend some applications will actually be sending money to the Treasurer rather than the services in the Family Court. Minister, could you respond to these questions?

See this speech in context