Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2019. The member for Isaacs, who just spoke, is somewhat confused. On the one hand he says that the Family Law Act has served Australia well, but a few short sentences prior to that he was saying that no-one on that side of the chamber would accept that the Family Law Act has continued to benefit Australians in recent times. I'm the chair of the Social Policy And Legal Affairs Committee, and we're conducting an inquiry at the moment in relation to domestic and family violence. The terms of reference of that inquiry have been carefully crafted to try and avoid hearing evidence in relation to the many problems that are experienced by users of the family law system, simply because there is a specific inquiry that is currently under way at the moment with Kevin Andrews in the Joint Select Committee on Australia's Family Law System, which is specifically dealing with problems with the Family Law Act. I understand that that inquiry report is due to be handed down in February next year, as is the Social Policy and Legal Affairs Committee report into domestic and family violence. One of the common themes that the inquiry has heard consistently is that the family law system is broken.

How the member for Isaacs could stand up and say that the Family Law Act has served Australians well is beyond me. I don't want to join in some sort of politicisation of this issue, because this issue is so very important to the welfare of Australians. As a barrister, I'll put my hand up and say I consciously did not choose to practice in this area of law. Certainly my peripheral experience has been reflected in what I have heard during the inquiry I am undertaking at the moment: many harrowing stories of domestic violence that have been told to the committee often stem back to what users have said is a hopelessly broken and protracted family law system. That is not just being said by one or two people; this is consistent across the evidence of many peak bodies and individual users who have either been through the system or are currently going through the system right now.

They say that the ultimate form of insanity is to keep doing what you have been doing and expecting a different result. Things had to change, and the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2019 will go a considerable way to improving the way that family law and marriage break-ups will be dealt with in this country. The Morrison government is committed to ending unnecessary costs and delay for thousands of Australian families that arise from a split federal and family court system and to a new system that provides safe pathways for separating families. I don't think anybody in this chamber would dispute that that is a worthy goal, that families who are undertaking a marriage dissolution should get the best system possible at a time which is probably the worst time of their lives. The longer this system is protracted and the longer that families are forced to go through a system which is broken, the greater risk there is for domestic and family violence. Does anyone on the other side of this chamber quibble with that statement? The longer that families have to endure a broken family law system, the greater the prospect, however terrible that is, that women will be subjected to domestic and family violence. That is unacceptable.

Structural reform of the federal family law courts will ensure that families are able to have their matters dealt with as efficiently as possible. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2019 brings together the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia as an overarching, unified administrative structure to be known as the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The Family Court will continue in existence as the Federal Circuit and Family Court Division 1. I will refer to that as division 1 from here on. The Federal Circuit Court will continue in existence as the Federal Circuit and Family Court Division 2, and from here on I'll refer to that as division 2.

The bill creates a consistent pathway for Australian families to have their family law disputes dealt with in the federal courts. Under the government's reform, there will be a single point of entry for the federal family law jurisdiction and, ultimately, a common set of rules, practices and procedures and approach to case management. The reforms enabled by these bills will improve the user experience for those Australian families that, unfortunately, need the assistance of the courts to resolve their disputes, and they will promote improved practices by both courts and legal practitioners.

Division 1 would be conferred original jurisdiction in family law and child support proceedings only where matters were transferred to it from division 2 as part of the single-point-of-entry model. Matters will be filed in division 2 in the first instance and transferred to division 1 as required, consistent with the courts' case management processes. This will reduce confusion for families about where to file and will reduce unnecessary transfers of matters between division 1 and division 2. It will improve the user experience of the family law court system considerably.

The court would retain the same appellate jurisdiction as the Family Court; however, more appeals will be heard by a single judge. Through enabling a presumption of single-judge appeals from decisions of division 2, judges of division 1 would be more available to hear more first-instance matters, giving families a quicker resolution to their matters.

The overarching purpose of the new family law case management provisions is to facilitate the just resolution of disputes according to law and as quickly, inexpensively and efficiently as possible. Everyone in the family law system must conduct proceedings consistently with this overarching purpose. The transfer provisions, in combination with the case management provisions, would ensure matters are in the most appropriate court as early as possible and with as little interruption as possible. Division 2 would retain the same original jurisdiction as the Federal Circuit Court and be extended to include family law and child support matters over which the Family Court currently has exclusive jurisdiction. This would be a key component of the single-point-of-entry model for first-instance family law and child support proceedings. Family law judicial appointments will have to include consideration of the person's knowledge, experience, skills and aptitude relevant to hearing family law cases, including cases involving family violence.

The legislation does not get rid of the specialist court. It enshrines a minimum of 25 judges in accordance with the Semple report. The Family Court is not the only court with specialist judges. The Federal Circuit Court currently has 40 full-time specialist judges who do nothing other than sit on family law matters—the largest division of specialist family law judges in this country. Those judges have an average of 25 years experience, and the Federal Circuit Court currently does 88 per cent of all family law cases and 90 per cent of all parenting matters, including complex matters. Overall, a total of 50 full-time-equivalent judges do 17,000 daily law cases, with a lower appeal rate per judge than the specialist Family Court of Australia judges—25 of whom do only 3,000 cases, with substantial assistance from registrars.

The Family Court of Australia is now made up of many Federal Circuit Court judges, including a number in the appeal division. The reality is that not all Family Court of Australia judges came from family law practice. This makes it false that specialist family law judges sit in the family law court. A number were judges in district courts, working on crime, or they were silks working on crime. They were specialists in commercial or insolvency law. At least 25 per cent, if not more, of Family Court judges didn't come from a specialist background of family law, and practised in many other areas and many other jurisdictions.

This bill does not abolish the Family Court. The government has never suggested that this is the only family law reform to be pursued, and that is evidenced by the ongoing investment and action taken by the government to support the family law system. In the October 2020-21 budget, the government announced funding for the family law system, including funding of $87.3 million for family law services; funding of $12.8 million for an additional family law judge, five additional family law registrars and increased base funding for the Federal Circuit Court; funding of $2½ million for the federal family law courts to continue operating specialist COVID-19 lists; additional funding of $4.8 million for the Family Violence and Cross-Examination of Parties Scheme; the relocation of family law court registries in Rockhampton and Launceston to safer and more secure premises, at a cost of $7.7 million; funding of $1.8 million to implement the federal family violence orders; and a new case management system for the Family Court of Western Australia, at a cost of $2½ million.

The parliament has recently passed legislation to support the implementation of a new family safety risk-screening and triage process that will be piloted in the family law courts with a $13½ million government investment. The pilot, known as the Lighthouse Project, is about to begin operations in Brisbane, Parramatta and Adelaide. It will pilot a systematic approach to identifying and managing family safety by systematically screening all new parenting matters for family safety risks when filed in the court. Matters will be triaged according to the level of identified risk, and the Federal Circuit Court will operate specialist family violence lists to resolve high-risk matters faster and safely.

In 2017, the government funded the Federal Circuit Court, the Family Court and the Family Court of Western Australia to engage more family consultants. Family consultants are qualified social workers and psychologists who specialise in child and family issues after separation or divorce. More broadly, the government provided $340 million in funding as part of the Fourth Action Plan of the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, as well as a further $150 million in its COVID-19 domestic violence support package to respond to the impacts of the pandemic on vulnerable Australians. From 1 July 2020, the National Legal Assistance Partnership increased funding for frontline legal services, taking Commonwealth funding to more than $2 billion over five years to legal aid commissions, community legal centres and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander legal services. This bill represents sensible, pragmatic reform to a system that is broken, and I commend it to the House.

See this speech in context