Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

The Australian Greens opposed this inquiry from the outset not because we think there are no problems with the family law system but because those problems have been the subject of numerous comprehensive inquiries. Understanding the problem is not the issue—doing something about it is. This politically motivated inquiry sought to relitigate old issues and delay implementations of previous recommendations. It emboldened domestic violence offenders and retraumatised victims-survivors and their children. Experts and service providers opposed the inquiry. The government should have prioritised evidence based strategies to make family law safer for victims and survivors of family violence, rather than allowing this compromised inquiry to proceed.

The weight of evidence given to the committee over many months—years, in fact—confirms what was already known: that gendered violence is a core problem at the heart of the family law system; that inadequate resourcing has created delays and gaps in the system that continue to put women and children at risk; and that funding, specialisation and wraparound service models are the solution. We are relieved that, having heard all of the evidence, the committee's primary recommendations are not those championed by the men's rights movement. Instead, they largely acknowledge, once again, the need for a better understanding of gendered violence to be embedded throughout the family law system. The inquiry has identified, once again, the need for evidence based strategies and additional funding to make family law safer for survivors of family violence, and it has reaffirmed the role of the federal government in facilitating that.

While the inquiry was unnecessary and damaging, I thank everyone who—once again—made a submission, sharing their story and their expertise, who appeared at the public and private hearings or who briefed the committee. I thank, in particular, the secretariat staff for their tireless efforts to collate the evidence presented.

We have supported recommendations calling for more training for judicial officers and report writers, implementation of the successful Lighthouse Project and the priority property pool conciliation pilots, and increased staffing. We note the progress that's been made on harmonising definitions, procedures and information-sharing to reduce the number of times survivors have to re-live the same trauma. We note that progress and welcome it. But more needs to be done.

Importantly, the whole basis on which this inquiry was set up is the idea that women routinely weaponise the family law system against their ex-partners and concoct or exaggerate domestic and family violence. It is a horrifying and dangerous myth that cannot stand. This dangerous myth was clearly contradicted by the vast bulk of expert evidence to the inquiry, noting that women are more likely to underreport violence because they fear they will not be believed and they fear that disclosures of violence will disadvantage their case and jeopardise the safety of their children. The only way to strengthen the outcomes of family law matters is to ensure that they are heard by an experienced, specialist judge who has an understanding of the dynamics of family violence.

The final report notes that the merger of the Family Court with the Federal Circuit Court took effect on 1 September 2021. The Australian Greens, along with the vast majority of those working with and within the family law system and in the legal profession and former Family Court judges, opposed the merger. The merger risks the specialist expertise that is essential to ensuring a child safety focus in family law matters. We continue to oppose the merger and we believe that the strongest protection for children, families and survivors of family and domestic violence is a strong, standalone, specialist Family Court involving a holistic, specialist system of collaborative, culturally safe, co-located services and resources.

At least 60 per cent of Family Court matters involve domestic and family violence. The merger has delivered loss of specialisation in a court that relies on specialist expertise to navigate complex matters and ensure the safety of children. We support case management measures and the harmonisation of rules and practice directions, but we note that those measures were possible—and indeed already underway—without the merger. The backlog of cases is overwhelming and does a disservice to families seeking to move on safely with their lives.

Skilled, experienced registrars, liaison officers and non-judicial staff play a critical role in implementing risk screening and triaging programs. We support more registrars to help parties navigate the system, to prepare for interim hearings and to maximise the prospects of successful mediations. However, so many family law matters are complex and disputed. These cases simply cannot be resolved in a way that ensures the safety of children without a judicial hearing. This government must fund more family law judges to maintain the specialist expertise needed to resolve complex matters and improve the pace of justice. Justice delayed is justice denied.

On funding, review after review has confirmed that the entire family law framework is overstretched and underresourced. Funding in the 2021-22 budget for court programs and legal services is welcome, but it will not go far enough to reduce the significant delays and improve access to justice in the family law system. The government must ensure that legal aid, community legal centres, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander legal services and family violence prevention legal services, and their peak bodies, have adequate and secure funding to provide timely advice and representation to parties. Failing to strengthen the legal advice and assistance sector will simply exacerbate delays and costs that directly impact on the accessibility and quality of justice.

Finally, reform and review of the family law system will be critical to the success of the next national plan in protecting women and their children. It is essential that the national plan provides for culturally safe wraparound and responsive support services so that women and their children have access to immediate support when leaving abusive relationships and longer-term support to navigate the legal system. The plan must be funded to at least $12 billion over the life of the plan—that's $1 billion each year—for prevention programs and for legal, social and support services for families and survivors of family and domestic violence.

As highlighted at the recent Women's Safety Summit, it's also critical to have a standalone plan for First Nations women and children. We welcome the government's apparent commitment to a First Nations women's national plan. However, this plan must be truly self-determined by and prioritise the expertise and solutions of First Nations women and their community controlled services and organisations. We call on the government to hold a First Nations women's gathering to facilitate the development of this plan. And at all stages of developing this plan, First Nations leadership, expertise and solutions must be prioritised.

This was a politicised and fraught inquiry. We are glad it is over and we call on the government to now finally do what needs to be done to provide a family law system that works to minimise trauma and maximise the safety of all parties and their children. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted.