Steve Georganas (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

We need to start by recognising the importance of the family law system to the wellbeing and safety of children and families, and the role that the Family Court has played over the years since its inception in 1975 under the Whitlam government—and, when we look at major reforms in this country, they're always under a Labor government. Whether it's Medicare, whether it's the Family Court system or whether it's the NDIS, it's always a Labor government that produces the big reforms that benefit the country. Again, in those important reforms to the family law system in 1975, the focus was on the wellbeing and safety of families across the nation. That was the purpose of the Family Law Act in 1975, when the Family Court of Australia was produced under the Whitlam government.

But what we've seen in the last seven years is seven years of neglect by this coalition government. The family law system, we know, is in a state of unprecedented crisis. We know that, if you really want to intervene in this area and make it better, you need to fund it properly. We've seen funding go backwards, despite the number of cases that are going before the family courts. We need to ensure that we protect families, as I said, and especially children. If the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2019 and the cognate bill are passed, they will cause further harm to vulnerable children and families, and that is the concern that we all should have here. We know that, if these bills pass—and it's been said by many speakers on this side—it will cause harm to the families and children who are in need of specialist family law assistance. That's exactly what the federal Family Court of Australia is; it's the specialist court for these particular things.

We on this side have been calling, and again I will call, for the government to withdraw this damaging bill and instead get to work on things that will actually help Australian families in a time of need—for example, by responding to the 60 recommendations of the Australian Law Reform Commission's landmark 2019 review of the family law system. That would be a start. That would be a good beginning that we would all be happy to support, knowing that it would enhance the system. The government need to increase resources to the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court in order to reduce case backlogs, in order to reduce the waiting times and the frustration that go with that and in order to finalise never-ending cases and end the stress that that causes families.

If the government want to do something to ensure that it operates smoothly, increase the resources. Increase the funding. Increase the resources to the legal assistance services that provide vital help to vulnerable families at a time of particular crisis and stress, including legal aid commissions, family violence prevention legal services, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander legal services, women's legal services and other community legal centres. We've seen diminishing resources for all of these services over the last seven years. Most importantly, the government should be consulting people, experts, to progress meaningful reforms—meaningful reforms—to improve the experience of all people using the family law system.

We know that the bill that that was put before the parliament for those reforms in 1975 was opposed by the then opposition. There were arguments and debates. We know that there's always been resistance from those opposite to improving our family law system, especially the Family Court, which is a standalone specialist and superior court. Prior to the Family Law Act, there were 14 grounds for granting a divorce. They included things like adultery, desertion, habitual drunkenness and imprisonment. Insanity was one of them. To get a divorce, a spouse had to prove the other party was at fault. All this did was ensure there was plenty of work for private investigators around the place. None of us want to see us go back to that. I'm not saying the bill does that, but through diminishing the court system—by chipping away at it, bit by bit—we could end up in that same position in years to come if we're not all vigilant, in this place, about ensuring that this Family Court is resourced properly. That's what this government should do. If they want to enhance the system, if they want to make it better, if they want to streamline it, they should resource it, fund it and ensure that the judiciary, judges, are appointed in a timely fashion. They should do the things that actually help people.

When the Family Law Bill 1974 was debated in the House of Representatives over 45 years ago, nearly half the House spoke on it. Fifty-nine members made speeches. The House spent nearly a month—a month—debating it. There was disagreement; there were different views and different arguments, but the House showed a real interest in it, on both sides: those who opposed it and those who supported it. But today we see hardly anyone from the other side speaking on this important change that's being proposed. It's such an important change, such a serious change, to the legal system of our country. Yet no-one on the other side wants to come up and argue the points, debate it or tell us why they think it will improve the system. There have only been a handful of people. It's a contrast to the seriousness that was given to this bill 45 years ago by the then opposition, the Liberal Party. If you want to make these changes, come into this House, debate them, tell us your views, tell us why this change will enhance the community. None of that is happening.

If anything, the need for a specialist Family Court has only become more pronounced over time, as the Australian Law Reform Commission noted in its landmark 2019 report on the family law system—a report the government commissioned but has completely ignored. They commissioned it, they went through with it, but they have ignored this report on the family law system.

There is no way that the Whitlam government, back in 1974-75, would have foreseen the growth in the incidence—and awareness—of family violence and child abuse. Case numbers have grown, obviously, and there are longer lists. But specialisation does not just mean specialist judges. The Whitlam government's vision of a specialist law court was of a court with interrelated, co-located services and resources. It was about creating an environment that would have regard to what Whitlam back then described as the 'human problems'. We're talking about the human problems—of couples, families and children—not just the legal rights. That's what it was specialised for. The realisation of that vision has never been more important than today, especially for vulnerable children and for families who need the Family Court system. Not only do they need it to be efficient; they need it to be safe for and sensitive to their particular needs and vulnerabilities. What this bill will do, if it is successful and goes through this place, is diminish those things, those absolutely essential things, that were at the forefront for the MPs of the day who were producing this law in 1975. It was to be efficient but also—and this is very important—safe for and sensitive to those with particular needs and vulnerabilities. They're the people who will be hurt most by this bill.

Everyone accepts that there are problems in the Family Court at present. We have constituents that come and see us regularly and we know there are issues. But if you really want to fix it, it's not a mystery, it's not rocket science. The Australian Law Reform Commission found:

… the family law system has been deprived of resources to such an extent that it cannot deliver the quality of justice expected of a country like Australia, and to whose family law system other countries once looked and tried to emulate.

That is really important because we need the system to be efficient, but to make it efficient it has to be resourced, and that's the area that this government has absolutely forgotten about. This is an area, like many other areas, this government claimed that they don't know anything about. It's not rocket science. Everyone accepts that there are problems with waiting times, et cetera—but if you want to fix it, that's the way to do it.

Over the last seven years, the story of the Australian family law system has been a story of neglect, neglect and more neglect—neglect by this government, led by Tony Abbott to begin with, then neglect by the Malcolm Turnbull Liberal government, and neglect by this current government led by Prime Minister Scott Morrison. This is what the report says: Family Court and Federal Circuit Court judges have not been replaced in a timely manner; funding has not increased in response to increasing demand; and review after review, including many dozens of sensible and measured recommendations, have all been ignored. When you have increasing demand, nearly doubling over the last 10 to 15 years, and review after review saying you have to resource it to keep up with that demand, and those resources aren't put the to the system, well, of course we're going to have problems. But this is not the way to fix it. This bill does nothing to fix those issues. The government should be working really hard to fix the family law system, but instead the government remains determined to talk about restructuring the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court in a way that will make a bad situation an even worse situation for the most vulnerable Australian families, including vulnerable children. This bill does nothing to fix the problems that exist. Those problems are about making appointments in a timely fashion and ensuring that resources are put in to keep up with the demand that is required.

Deputy Speaker, you'd also expect that such radical reform by this government would be based on good evidence, good advice and research. You'd expect that the government would have consulted widely, but it hasn't. The Morrison government claims that the proposed merger has been informed by independent reviews and inquiries over a decade. The evidence base for the reforms is not there. The only problem with these inquiries is that none of the reports listed on the website recommended these radical reforms. All these reports and investigations were done, but not one actually recommends these reforms. So why is the government pushing ahead with this particular bill? None of the reports even considered that these reforms would better the system. In fact, the only one of the five reports that recommended restructuring the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court recommended an entirely different model from the one that's being proposed today—an entirely different model.

We should go back to the vision of those MPs in this House, 45 years ago, that spoke about enhancing the system, making it simpler and protecting vulnerable families and vulnerable children. This bill will only take us backwards; it is not going to take us forwards. If we're not all vigilant about this particular bill, then the chipping away of the Family Court system through this bill and maybe another one next year and maybe another one the year after, will diminish the entire system and we could see ourselves back in the position that we were in 45 years ago, where the only ones making money are the private investigators.

See this speech in context