Senate debates

Wednesday, 28 March 2018

Documents

Federal Circuit Court and Family Court of Australia; Order for the Production of Documents

9:56 am

Photo of Murray WattMurray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Okay. The subject matter of this particular notice to produce concerns something that Senator Hanson has been very vocal about, along with a number of other senators, and that is the funding crisis that we see in the family courts in Australia and the backlog in family law cases that that funding crisis is producing.

While Labor did not move this motion seeking the production of documents—so no accusation can be made that this is some sort of partisan exercise from the opposition; it was moved by a number of crossbench senators—we share the concerns of a number of crossbench senators about the funding crisis that is enveloping the family courts and the backlogs that that funding crisis is causing for many Australians who want to see their family law disputes resolved. This order to produce simply sought the production of documents that the government has in its possession.

Not long after they were elected, under the then Prime Minister, Mr Abbott, the government commissioned a review into the funding of the federal courts and the family courts. They are sitting on a March 2014 report from KPMG, a report into the funding of federal courts, and they're also sitting on some costings that were prepared by Ernst & Young in response to that report from KPMG.

The motion that was moved last week and passed by the Senate was an entirely reasonable motion that sought to get access to these documents so that the Senate can better understand the rationale behind this government's continued refusal to properly fund the family courts. I think we can understand why the government is so keen to keep these reports secret, because, under this government, the Federal Circuit Court, which handles many family law matters, and also the Family Court have been driven to crisis. This government has now been sitting on this report for four years. You would really think that it would want to get that report out there in the public domain to help explain its own decisions about funding the family courts, but instead, four years later, we are still trying to obtain access to this report.

Why is the government sitting on this report four years on? It's pretty obvious that it's because it must reveal that there is a $75 million shortfall in court funding which this government has refused to fix. Fortunately, we are now rid of the former Attorney-General, the man who I think we're now to refer to as Mr Brandis. Fortunately, we're now rid of him.

Comments

No comments