CHAPTER 9
The effect on the wider community
Introduction
9.1 The failure of the Commonwealth Government to take into account the
complex nature of the provision of legal aid services and the interdependency
of the groups that provide these services has had a profound effect on
a wide range of individuals and groups.
9.2 In considering item 3(b) of the September 1996 terms of reference
achieving national equity and uniform access to justice the Committee
was advised by a number of organisations and individuals that the impact
of funding changes and the related emphasis on efficiency and management
was both long and short term. Similar comments were also made to the Committee
in respect of a focus it had adopted for the current phase of its inquiry
– access to litigation and legal services by disadvantaged individuals
and groups. Witnesses stated that the reduction in funding and the increased
difficulty in obtaining any funding or sufficient funding to complete
a case did have an immediate impact on the individual and indeed, on a
range of groups such as legal aid commissions, community legal centres
and others, as described in the previous Chapter. However, both the individual
and society in general were affected in the long term by reduced access
and by the difficulties involved in seeking and using funds.
9.3 In the short term, people were specifically disadvantaged in a number
of ways – for example through having to represent themselves in a
difficult family law matter; live with a criminal record which was undeserved;
or be unable to proceed with a discrimination case because of lack of
funds. In the longer term, the effects of these circumstances could be
felt in a number of ways, for example, through loss of employment opportunities
because of a criminal record, or poor housing because of not being able
to obtain a suitable property settlement in a family law matter. They
could also be felt by the community at large, through greater demands
being placed on society, for example, demands for health and social services,
and an increased need for unemployment payments:
in the legal aid context we are by definition talking about the very
people who are least able to represent themselves in a court of law. By
virtue of being poor they are also among the group that is the least educated
and the least healthy, and the group that has the greatest personal difficulty
managing their lives. These are the problems that they bring into the
courtroom. [1]
9.4 The Committee believes that the existing legal aid arrangements in
Australia are failing to achieve adequate access to justice by those in
need in the Australian community. In real terms the means test has become
more difficult to meet, and there is a much stricter approach taken to
the merits test. [2] The inevitable consequence
is that fewer people are able to access legal aid: `The funding cuts of
30% proposed by the Commonwealth Government will lock almost 50,000 Australians
out of the courts over the next three years'. [3]
9.5 From the evidence put to the inquiry, it is also clear to the Committee
that these shortages have real human costs. This Chapter examines the
effects of the changes to the legal aid regime on individuals, and those
in disadvantaged groups.
9.6 Just as importantly, the lack of access and the somewhat random nature
of funding allocation depending on availability rather than on the merits
of a case, was seen as eroding society's respect for the law:
In reality, this [ordinarily] prudent self-funded litigant test is not
applied. The real test is: how much money is there in the kitty, and what
can we afford to pay now? [4]
9.7 When access is a lottery rather than a right, law itself is further
devalued; and the exclusion of people from equitable access can lead to
a loss of faith in principles which were once highly regarded. [5]
9.8 The Committee believes that the community in general will be adversely
affected by the decrease in funding. This is evidenced by the limited
capacity of the community to be involved in public interest issues; by
the decreased comment on a range of concerns such as environmental matters
and a consequential loss of participation in the democratic process; and
by a change in attitudes to basic principles such as the belief in a right
to a fair trial.
Community awareness of legal services
9.9 As noted above, the community demand for legal services, including
services funded through legal aid, has increased substantially. This increase
has been occurring at the same time that funding for legal aid and other
services has either been reduced in real terms, or has been restricted
to specific issues.
9.10 This increase in demand reflects community expectations which have
arisen in part because of education on rights of review and on rights
generally, awareness of a number of public interest issues such as the
environment, and because of the specific provision in legislation for
a range of appeal rights. [6]
Increased involvement of the community in utilising rights
9.11 Witnesses stated that in the past few years the community had become
more involved in a number of issues and more aware of their right to question
decisions which impacted on them, [7] such as
equal opportunity and discrimination:
[Discrimination] is a very complex area of law. The law itself is developing
apace. People's awareness in the community generally of their right to
access equal opportunity laws, discrimination laws, is growing as the
legislation becomes better known in the community. [8]
9.12 Community awareness of rights was also being increased by some legal
practices taking up cases that had perhaps received insufficient attention
through official channels. These include unsolved murders, police involvement
in deaths, and coronial inquiries. [9] Other
issues where there was a seen to be a growing public awareness, and to
some degree a belief in a right to some legal advice or assistance, included
social security payments and similar benefits such as Austudy, family
law, criminal matters, civil law issues, and environmental matters at
a number of levels: [10]
One need only look at recent surveys to find that the vast majority of
people are concerned about environmental protection and believe that government
needs to do more to effectively regulate environmentally harmful activities.
These concerns demand citizen involvement in formulating governmental
environmental policy. [11]
9.13 To some extent, the Commonwealth as well as the states had attempted
to link public rights to a public capacity to access justice. As issues
such as discrimination, equal opportunity and the environment became a
part of the community experience, funding had also been provided to facilitate
legal action. Some of this funding had been provided separately from `legal
aid' grants, and is still maintained in this separate form. [12]
However, information received from the Attorney-General's Department on
this funding suggests that it may not be known to legal practitioners
for example, only $73,278 was paid in 1996-97 for assistance in sex and
race discrimination cases. [13]
9.14 Funding is also provided in some states for specific areas of discrimination
or need, such as mental health or intellectual disability, and this funding
may be provided through a health rather than a justice program. [14]
Other specialist areas had been funded through mainstream legal aid, or
in some cases, through community legal centres. Specialist legal services
for aged people, for example, were provided by a community legal centre
receiving both state and Commonwealth monies, [15]
as a part of the aged care advocacy services made available across the
country within the aged care program. [16]
Specialist discrimination services were also available at a generalist
community legal centre. [17]
Need for appropriate services
9.15 This does not of course mean that all individuals and groups in
society are equally aware of, or able to exercise, their rights. The Committee
is aware that the need for legal aid and for other legal services –
including information – is particularly important for specific groups
in society who have no other resources to deal with issues. It is these
groups which are disproportionately affected by changes; thus an issue
which may seem relatively minor to a person with greater financial and
other resources, may have a substantial effect on the short and long term
well-being of another.
Case Study
An Indigenous women and her husband were persuaded to buy a car from
the local car sales agency and the car salesman arranged the credit through
a credit agency. Both the women and her husband were in receipt of Social
Security payments and had informed the salesman, but he completed the
credit application for them and wrote that both the woman and her husband
were working as Aboriginal artists, earning $40,000 a year each. The woman
and her husband were not able to keep up the high repayments and had to
declare bankruptcy. The car that was sold to them for $28,000 was only
valued at $14,000 and with the interest rate, their total debt had blown
out to $56,000 over 2 years. [18]
9.16 The Committee is also aware that being informed of the existence
of rights and being educated to exercise them is no guarantee of such
rights being utilised. A major problem for many of those to whom legal
aid services are directed is that they are often tentative about rights
and extremely inexperienced in implementing them:
There are unique access issues for people with disabilities that have
to be taken into account. The first is that people with disabilities are
usually poor … just having a disability costs money. … Most
of our clients have spent time in care in institutions, such as in community
residential units and in hospitals for substantial periods, so they are
disadvantaged in that way as well.
It also means that they have quite limited educational opportunities.
… In the past, people with disabilities were not in the community,
so they did not have access to normal educational resources. They are
often less educated and less able to operate systems.
Another thing we have found is social isolation. The disability itself
can be isolating, let alone the social context in which you live. …
Those … issues are very important when you are talking about access
to legal services and litigation. If there is a thrust of our position,
it has to be on community education. It plays an important role in the
provision of legal services. [19]
9.17 For this reason, legal education programs need to be structured
to take into account the specific needs of their clients. Further, they
must also be supported and supplemented by appropriate resources to provide
the type of services required. Many of these services will need to take
account of the powerlessness and disorientation of relatively recent migrants
groups:
Financial difficulties, unemployment, isolation from family and other
support networks, language problems, culture shock & discrimination
are experiences common to all migrants. Refugees are often not in Australia
by choice and in some cases may be suffering from torture in their country
of origin and/or incarceration. Migrant women are often even more disadvantaged
than their male counterparts, registering higher levels of unemployment,
lower workforce status and lower English proficiency rates. [20]
9.18 To provide quality services which enhance access costs money, a
factor which is often unrecognised by government. For example, the shortage
of interpreters for people of non English speaking background will seriously
affect the access of many individuals to information much less litigation.
Case Study
I had my first experience today of a Croatian woman coming to the door
and saying she wants family law legal advice. I cannot give it to her
with a face to face interpreter because it is quite clear that it is federal,
unless I can manage to get one of the 23 TIS interpreters available for
all of New South Wales on any one day. I tried to suggest that she should
ring one of our solicitors and use the Telephone Interpreter Service.
She said that it is a complex question to do with a family law settlement
that has already happened, and that it would require someone to sit down
with her to read the orders and explain them to her and explain whether
or not she has any options from there on in. So she has nowhere to go,
unless we pay for the interpreter service. [21]
Rural and regional services
9.19 Several witnesses identified a range of difficulties experienced
in obtaining access to legal services in rural and regional areas. Many
of the problems experienced by people outside the urban population are
similar to those experienced by city residents, including the shortage
of funds and the difficulty involved in finding an appropriate service.
9.20 However, it was also believed that people in many rural areas experienced
additional difficulty because some of the alternative resources which
might be found in more populous areas were not available. The hardship
for persons in rural and regional areas is often exacerbated by a lack
of community services including preventative programs, self help programs,
legal education and advice services.
9.21 Other problems occurring in rural areas included:
- possible conflict of interest because of the limited number of legal
practitioners in an area; [22]
- unwillingness to take on legal aid cases because of low remuneration;
- travel costs; and
- reduced quality of service because of a higher dependence on phone
rather than personal contact. [23]
9.22 A considerable emphasis was placed in evidence on the particular
problems of women in rural and regional areas, including:
- no or little knowledge of the existence of services;
- huge delays before actually seeing a worker because of the worker's
enormous workloads;
- distrust of some services by some women in the communities …
- lack of confidence in legal services;
- many women identified that confidentiality was broken, where a worker
in a service would know the perpetrator of the violence. This issue
of `mateship' between people in authority and the perpetrators of violence
was evident for many female workers when trying to get police to act
on behalf of women victims. [24]
9.23 Evidence was also given that the belief that legal aid was not available
affected people in rural and regional areas as well as in urban areas,
and this led to further claims upon community legal centres: `The lawyers
have told them that they are not likely to get legal aid and there is
no point in applying for it'. [25]
9.24 The shortage of legal aid may certainly exacerbate these problems.
For example, in remote areas it may not be possible to get legal aid to
locate children who had been removed contrary to a court order, or the
cost of enforcing an order might be prohibitive. [26]
Some evidence also suggested that in some areas there was little support
for women seeking help in locating their children, even though help might
be available:
Police from local stations have admitted that at times they failed to
inform the distressed woman that she could contact the Federal Police
but simply asked her to leave the police station as they were unable to
assist. [27]
9.25 Where a local culture devalues some members of the society and provides
protection to those who have broken the law, the difficulty of providing
assistance through legal aid becomes even more complex.
Recommendation 21
The Committee recommends that Commonwealth and state and territory
governments give priority to the provision of appropriate legal aid services
to meet the specific needs of different communities.
Complex legislation increases need for legal assistance
9.26 There was little specific information on the extent to which Commonwealth
or state legislation itself had precipitated a demand for legal aid because
of increasing change or complexity. Some evidence was provided which suggested
that legislation, both state and Commonwealth, was a factor in
increasing demand for help:
Improvements in the legal system which reduce the amount of assistance
required … would include a reduction in the complexity and volume
of legislation. [28]
9.27 Other evidence suggested both that some legislation could be improved
and the individual or group it concerned required some legal assistance
in dealing with it. For example this appeared to be the case in respect
of legislation concerning aged care, especially residential care, an area
which has been subject to considerable change. The diffidence of some
older people and their concern about intimidation could contribute to
the need for experienced advocates and specialised services. [29]
Like other groups in society, older people may need assistance in becoming
aware of rights and then of those processes by which to enforce those
rights:
People feel powerless. They do not feel that they have the right to follow
things up. They do endure things because of that. Their perception is
that the law is not something that is available to them either because
of their difficulty in framing what they need or from the point of view
of not having the money to go to law. [30]
9.28 An Administrative Appeals Tribunal representative advised that complexity
of legislation was an issue requiring the layperson to have some legal
help:
within social security there can also be very complex matters which involve
a number of different amendments to the legislation and relate to transitional
provisions and application and accrued rights, and assistance from solicitors
can be very helpful. When you add to that issues about lack of funds,
lack of education, language difficulties and those sorts of things, they
can also be remedied to a large degree by assistance from a solicitor.
[31]
9.29 Legislative complexity was also seen as a problem for veterans,
as was noted by witnesses for both the Returned and Services League and
for the Vietnam Veterans Association. In part this was compounded by some
veterans being frail, [32] although the amount
of legislation and its detail appeared to be a major factor affecting
the capacity of people to act for themselves without legal expertise:
A Vietnam veteran has a limited capacity to cope with the demands of
a complex, bureaucratic claims system and the detailed rules of law made
pursuant to a lengthy and constantly changing Veterans' Entitlements Act.
… At the appeals level, good legal representation is vital. A veteran
or war widow alone is no match for the experienced departmental legal
expertise used and which is supported by the Australian Government Solicitor's
Office. [33]
9.30 The NSW Environmental Defender's Office also advised that environmental
legislation was complex and was continually changing, a matter which the
office sought to address in part through its education and information
service. [34]
9.31 In other instances, legislation itself might be relatively straightforward,
as with discrimination law, but people's vulnerability or lack of experience,
might require they have expert assistance: `the processes themselves are
reasonably adequate, but the resources given to those processes are not'.
[35] In such circumstances people with high
levels of education or a higher socio-economic status had no particular
advantage. For people who were under other pressures, the need for sound
advice and also real assistance with the litigation stage was even higher.
A lot of people in this jurisdiction [family law] do not have much understanding
of what is going on; they are very emotionally involved. If they do not
have a source of objective legal advice, then you often find them getting
involved further and further in litigation, or certainly not resolving
it. [36]
9.32 Some witnesses stated that they did not see complex or regularly
amended legislation as a major causal factor of the demand for legal aid.
However, they also believed this did not mean that there was not confusion
in the community about aspects of legislation. For example, changes to
funding for other services had often meant that a greater demand was made
of legal aid bodies to assist in a range of areas, including:
- information on how to represent oneself;
- information about specific legislation, such as that relating to disability
or financial matters, which may once have been dealt with by bodies
that now have reduced funding; and
- information about mediation or other non-litigation processes. [37]
9.33 In evidence to the Committee, the South Australian Legal Services
Commission detailed the types of issues under Commonwealth law that could
cause substantial problems and where sound advice was often required very
quickly. Even though a litigation service in a particular area might not
be funded under the guidelines, the individuals affected were still required
to take some action. [38] In these circumstances,
as the Law Council of Australia stated, funding cuts could seriously disadvantage
those people who had fewer coping mechanisms:
Priorities and guidelines of an exclusionary nature result in unacceptable
and undesirable inflexibility to respond to community demand or need.
An example of this situation is illustrated by aid being restricted in
lower Court pleas where the accused does not face a `real likelihood'
of imprisonment. Yet these are the very Courts in which the elderly, the
disadvantaged or the disabled within the community are most likely to
be found. These are the Courts where they most need assistance to be able
to cope with the stresses and strains associated with a Court appearance
even though on an objective legal aid analysis there is no `real likelihood'
of imprisonment. [39]
9.34 Some of the confusion and uncertainty experienced by people who
had limited access to information services could be reflected in the number
of appeals made to bodies such as the Social Security Appeals Tribunal:
one of the things we do in introducing people to the appeal process …
is to talk to them about their understanding of the legislation and why
the decision has apparently been made this way … we try to clarify
the points of law that are being discussed in the preamble to the hearing.
[40]
9.35 Some witnesses believed that access to justice through the appeal
mechanism was a process still important to the community. In areas of
law where the interpretation of the legislation may vary, and in a situation
in which there were limited costs involved, the availability of an inexpensive
body such as the SSAT may increase access to justice outside of the legal
aid system. [41] A certain percentage of appeals
to the SSAT may have resulted in people understanding the legislation
they were complaining about, and the SSAT process may also have a flow
on effect, reducing the extent of complaints, appeals, or overpayments,
and developing further understanding:
[administrative law sections - ALS] have time to analyse and look at
the decision in terms of whether they think there has been an error at
law or whether there has been new information introduced which has led
to a different decision. … In terms of the normative benefits that
can flow from our decisions, the ALS is obviously a conduit back into
Centrelink and back to original decision-makers, so hopefully there is
feedback into the department to say, `This is a better interpretation
of the law than was the original decision.'
Equally, as a national convenor, I quite often have matters referred
to me from states and territories which I will take up nationally as issues
which warrant either a look at the legislation or, indeed, policy and
how the legislation is administered. [42]
9.36 Similar flow on effects can also result from other courts and tribunals
of course, a point noted by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal which
suggested that in these key cases it would probably be preferable for
applicants to have legal representation:
there are often cases in social security and other jurisdictions when
there are very important principles to be enunciated and a very important
issue to be determined which is going to be of precedent value. …
In those cases, if it was felt by the tribunal that the case would be
more appropriately managed and assisted with legal aid assistance, I think
it would be helpful for us to be able to indicate that, and that indication
to lead to the provision of such a service. [43]
The effect of funding changes on individuals
Evidence on the effect of changes to legal aid
9.37 As noted in Chapter 2, there is limited research on the issue of
need for legal aid and other legal services. Similarly, limited research
has been undertaken on the effects on the community and individuals of
the changes to legal aid. The actual measurement of the impact was rarely
referred to, and it was not apparent that any monitoring process had been
established to determine if the changes had a measurable and an appreciable
impact on individuals or groups.
9.38 Much of the material provided to the Committee on effects of changes
was anecdotal, although these anecdotal instances were seen to represent
a wide range of experience and to be common to many service providers.
[44] It was also noted that the term `anecdotal'
might suggest that the evidence was less strong than was believed: `I
think calling it anecdotal … would be perhaps selling it short'.
[45] The Family Law Practitioners Association
in Queensland referred to research it was sponsoring:
The research arose out of seeing [the advertisement on the Legal Aid
inquiry] Those who met realised that all we had to say was a lot of anecdotes
which, although put together seemed quite compelling, at a policy level
we did not believe that it was going to have a great deal of impact …
we needed to get something more systematised to have some impact. So we
have a fair idea of what the answers are going to be but we hope that
the answers will come to you with some greater authority ... [46]
9.39 It was also noted that given the limited research on needs, the
capacity to measure impact was also limited:
The Federation considers that a national study of unmet legal need is
a necessary precursor to a satisfactory impact statement. It is only after
such a study is undertaken that the true impact of funding cuts and changes
in arrangements can be assessed. [47]
9.40 The Committee was advised that various research projects were underway
or would commence soon, and that these would provide further information
on the issues of need and also the effect on people of changes. [48]
This information will be a welcome addition to the available data, and
should provide greater insight into the effects of decreased funding.
In the absence of this research, the following assessment of the impact
of reductions in funding is based on submissions and oral evidence, and
on additional material forwarded to the Committee.
The effect on `Commonwealth persons'
9.41 Under long standing legal aid arrangements, the Commonwealth had
assumed a particular responsibility for categories of people, specifically
migrants, indigenous people, veterans and people in receipt of Commonwealth
benefits. [49] With the division of responsibility
in legal aid now primarily one between of Commonwealth matters and state/territory
matters, the position of the Commonwealth person has become less clear.
9.42 A major change that is said to have occurred in terms of the access
of the Commonwealth person to legal aid is that access to legal aid funds
is related to the nature of the case, that is, whether it is a Commonwealth
or a state matter. The Commonwealth looks after Commonwealth persons only
insofar as they are involved in a Commonwealth matter. It does not provide
funding, regardless of financial circumstances, in respect of state matters.
In this sense, the Commonwealth is seen to have placed much responsibility
for its traditional clientele back on the states: [50]
It is essentially a policy decision. A previous government in setting
up the ALAO used the notion of a Commonwealth person to support the argument
that the Commonwealth had a legitimate role to play in the provision of
legal aid. That is not the position of this government. [51]
9.43 Apart from veterans, who have retained much of their former special
status, the Commonwealth person appears to have been seriously disadvantaged
as a result of the legal aid changes. In fact, the concept of the Commonwealth
person has been undermined, both because of the separation of funding
into state/territory and Commonwealth matters; and because there is little
acknowledgment made of any special needs of specific groups.
Measurements of effect on individuals and groups
9.44 Although little detailed consideration appears to have been given
in policy development to the short and long term effects of the limited
access that disadvantaged people (including Commonwealth persons) have
to legal aid, the evidence provided to the Committee indicated a substantial
number of problems likely to arise or become worse because of limited
access to help and because of the apparent lack of reason or fairness
in government policy. These problems include lowering of self-esteem and
loss of control; economic disadvantage; cynicism, despair and anger; possible
greater need for other services in both the short and long term; and reduced
involvement in the community.
9.45 The Committee considers that the failure to acknowledge the substantial
difference between the needs of the `ordinarily prudent self funding litigant'
[52] and those of the people to whom legal
aid is directed is a major factor in creating stress and disillusion.
Lowering of self-esteem
9.46 The limited opportunity which people have to bring a meritorious
case is likely to be both a source of frustration and anger, and to limit
the individual's capacity to see themselves as a person of value.
The inability of persons who face discrimination to remedy that discrimination
because of economic disadvantage and lack of legal aid is of particular
concern. The failure to provide legal aid compounds the disadvantage they
already face and, on a human level, exacerbates the pain and suffering
caused by the act of discrimination. [53]
Despair and anger
9.47 Many witnesses also testified to the emotional effect of denial
of services, including tension, anger and frustration: [54]
Apart from the dollar costs … you need also to bear in mind the
human costs – the cost in stress to the litigant, the person who
sits in my office and cries or screams or thumps the table or threatens
suicide because they cannot see how they can get justice without representation
and they simply know of no alternatives open to them, and the cost more
broadly in alienation of people from the legal system under which they
live, and their growing disillusionment with the system as able to provide
any justice for them. People no longer expect to get justice out of courts
of law, and that is why we see them looking inappropriately for it in
other ways. [55]
9.48 Some of the anger and tension experienced by people results from
their having to act for themselves because they cannot get legal aid,
and also because although they may have some assistance it may be insufficient
to provide an acceptable outcome. [56] It is
also possible that unresolved issues are creating further tensions in
the community:
What we have experienced in community legal centres is a lot more anger
in clients, particularly in the area of family law. … I would like
to see more research undertaken at some time into the link between family
law and criminal law, and how many people in the community are actually
committing crimes that are related to family law, that are criminal matters.
I then talk about stalking, restraining orders, breaches of family law
matters, abducting children, and assaults. I think all those can be, and
some definitely relate to, family law matters, and the anger that is coming
out of family law matters which are unable to be resolved. [57]
9.49 The Committee was told that there were human costs, in terms of
a heightened antagonism and an added level of stress and frustration to
the unrepresented party and, at times, to the other party who might be
forced to hear inflammatory statements from the bar table from the unrepresented
party that judges feel obliged to let them make but would not permit from
their counsel. [58] The potential for violence
is increased. [59] In addition, there may be
severe stresses on victim witnesses having to undergo cross-examination
by someone charged with being the perpetrator, or in situations where
the unrepresented party cross-examines their spouse in Family Court proceedings.
Revolving door syndrome
9.50 Another source of anger and frustration was identified as resulting
from referrals from one service to another, with limited chance of obtaining
help from any. This has been described in a number of ways, including
shopping for help, [60] the revolving door
syndrome or the referral merry-go-round. [61]
There seems to be a referral merry-go-around. People are being shunted
from place to place. Not only community legal centres are having increased
demand; other community services are. People are ending up going from
place to place and not being able to get any help anywhere. Some politicians
find them in their offices. Eventually, they are referred back to the
CLC, which they have seen previously. By the time they get there, they
cannot even remember that they were there in the first place. It is quite
disturbing to think that these people are being shunted around, particularly
when they are in a stressful legal situation to start with. [62]
9.51 The Federation of Community Legal Centres also noted that this situation
could cause particular problems for people who were elderly or mentally
ill:
In this regard it is important to note that for persons seeking legal
assistance through legal aid or community legal centres the legal problem
with which they present is often the tip of complex difficulties involving
health, housing, financial crisis. Not being able to access assistance
can often be the breaking point. [63]
9.52 In some instances the revolving door syndrome reflects an inability
on the part of the legal system or the broader welfare and information
services to provide any assistance. However, it also can reflect lack
of management skills – if there is no likelihood of help available,
the individual in need will not be any better for making countless trips
and phone calls. This was recognised by some organisations which emphasised
that, instead of forwarding people without much thought, they sought to
identify an appropriate source of assistance – if there was one –
and help the client to make contact. [64]
They need strategy. Once they have their strategy, quite often, from
experience, they can resolve the matter. But it is really trying to make
sense of what is a very wooded forest that is difficult. That, I think,
is our biggest role. Then if it goes past that stage – they have
a strategy and they need to get an agreement – our conferencing program
works there. So it is really at that initial stage of trying to determine
their options and a strategy so they can then perhaps use other community
agencies to help the communication of determining a result from that strategy
that is important. [65]
9.53 Unthinking referral to some services could in fact be disadvantageous,
especially where the individual could not benefit from a particular service:
It is all very well to refer people to mediation or some other form of
dispute resolution, but people still need legal advice. You cannot go
into a mediation process without proper legal advice. They cannot get
that advice through an overworked welfare rights system. They possibly
can at community legal centres, but these do not have many resources,
and they cannot always provide solicitors' advice such as you would get
on a grant of aid through our advice service. … People are often
not able to get sufficient legal advice, or any advice. The revolving
door is going to be more and more apparent. [66]
Cynicism and disillusion
9.54 A number of witnesses also referred to the fact that people were
generally becoming more cynical about the availability of legal aid: `There
is almost a self-perpetuating cynicism developing amongst members of the
community that they do not expect either themselves or members of their
community to get justice'. [67]
We are finding that the level of despair in the tone of voice of people
… is significant. It reflects that sort of community concern …
and, to be somewhat selfish about it, it does result in a backlash against
the legal profession. When somebody like myself says, `Look, we'd love
to help you. We'll give you this sort of advice. We can help you with
our community advisory services. We can do this, this and this', there
is this cynicism, `Well, you really don't care about me, do you?' [68]
9.55 This also has the effect of limiting demand because people believe
that it is not worth making the effort to apply for funding.
9.56 One immediate effect of such cynicism and disinclination to apply
for funding is a widespread lowering of faith in the legal system. From
the perspective of the individual, rights are not rights unless they are
enforceable. The growing perception in the community is that legal aid
is unavailable to most people and that justice works only for the wealthy
and that the carefully developed system of rights that was supposed to
be for all members of the community is being demolished. The average person,
as well as the Commonwealth person, may believe that government considers
people are not worth investing in.
9.57 The Legal Services Commission of South Australia stated to the Committee:
It is something of a sad indictment on the state of legal aid in this
country when you get this headline and story introduction in the Brisbane
Courier Mail of Thursday 19 February:
Aged must sell home to get legal aid
Forty per cent of Queensland's aged pensioners would have to sell the
family home or other assets to be eligible for legal aid under tough means
tests, a study has found. [69]
Need for other services
9.58 Legal service bodies considered that there was insufficient recognition
of the fact that, when legal aid was not available, the demand for service
did not disappear but simply moved to another place. It is expected that
the denial of appropriate assistance will lead to greater demand being
made of welfare services for accommodation, food, money and other support.
The flow-on effects of not being able to present a reasonable case are
often long term and considerable: `Loss of even a percentage of subsistence
income can have dramatic consequence (for example loss of rental property,
incurring increasing debt, inability to purchase medication, inability
to take access to children).' [70]
9.59 Again, the Committee believes it is important to note that in such
circumstances the reality of the person requiring legal aid is different
to the reality of a prudent self-funding litigant, a concept which embraces
many middle to upper middle class values. The long term effect of changes
which may appear minor to one person may be devastating to the person
needing legal aid.
Loss of involvement in the community
9.60 People who are already marginalised by reason of low income, unemployment,
ill health, disability or a range of other factors, are also affected
by becoming less able to participate in a range of community activities
or to feel they are a participant in democratic institutions.
9.61 This situation is likely to be compounded for migrants who, because
of language difficulties and other problems have trouble understanding
the structure of a new society and the ways in which they may join it.
Effects in the family law area
9.62 The changes to legal aid funding were accompanied, according to
some evidence, by changes in the broader legal system which compounded
the effect. For example, the failure of the Commonwealth to appoint Family
Court judges to fill vacancies, combined with the funding limits on family
law legal cases, increased waiting times and meant that funds could be
expended prior to a hearing. [71] The effect
of a number of these changes on the profession, including the legal aid
bodies and the community legal centres, has been noted in Chapter 5 above.
The effects on the main parties, such as the unrepresented litigant, the
person with limited funds who can barely afford a trial (including those
people affected by delays and expenses caused by unrepresented litigants)
and children, is substantial. They contribute to the substantial stress,
anger and disillusion referred to above, and are likely to have a long
term detrimental effect on society as a whole. Where cases took a longer
period of time to resolve tensions that already exist are likely to increase.
[72]
9.63 As noted in Chapter 5, capping was also presenting many problems,
particularly when people had limited opportunity to obtain assistance.
Case Study
Until August 1995, a mother had sole custody and guardianship of her
ten year old boy. Due to long-term harassment from her former partner
she took her son interstate. The father found them and was able to obtain
an interim continuing access of one to two hours per week supervised.
The father sought further variation of custody and access arrangements.
The child's representative supported the child staying with the mother.
Four days before the final hearing legal aid was discontinued for the
mother and child representatives, because of a $15,000 `cap' on the grant
of legal aid. The mother continued unrepresented for two and a half weeks
in a case that should have taken three to four days and ends up with joint
residence of the child. [73]
9.64 Where people are unrepresented and do not have the required skills
or experience to cope, they may have a detrimental outcome. [74]
Moreover they may be subject to further intimidation or abuse:
Especially in cases involving, it seems, women who perhaps have just
been through a marriage or a relationship where there has been a power
imbalance, it is just exacerbating that problem for them where the other
side will continually make interlocutory applications, which of course
have to be defended. [75]
9.65 In some instances it was clear that it was a person's life experience,
lack of skills and limited education which might be the predominant cause
of a problem in benefiting from legal services. However, it was also believed
that one of the difficulties of the legal system was that many clients
could not rapidly move from being dependent to becoming capable (and therefore
able to use resources effectively):
It is certainly not a case of an informed, aware, empowered client directing
their legal counsel in terms of what they wish to happen in the course
of their case. It happens to them, and they do not know how or why. [76]
9.66 Problems that may once have been resolved at an early stage, with
some help, [77] may become intractable if funding
is not made available or if it is withheld awaiting the trial. [78]
In cases where domestic violence is involved, women may be disadvantaged
by delays in obtaining funding, and this can result in emotional and physical
damage, or death or serious physical abuse. Insufficient funding may also
limit the opportunity for cross examination and the opportunity to clarify
important issues which could affect the well being of a number of people.
[79] It was pointed out in this context that
the funding caps on family law matters were inequitable when compared
with the substantially larger cap for criminal cases, because the consequences
of inadequate funding in family law may well be major:
We are saying that we must allocate sufficient funds so an innocent person
does not go to gaol, but we are not balancing that by saying that we need
to allocate sufficient funds to ensure that children are safe and people
are not being killed or subject to continuing violence. [80]
9.67 The Committee has heard that stretched resources can increase pressure
to use alternative dispute resolution techniques in cases where it is
inappropriate, with potentially grave consequences for women:
I think this is going to be the effect of cuts on women in family law
matters: they are going to be either forced into mediation or forced into
settling or have to go on unrepresented. For a start, mediation can be
effective in some circumstances. But if there is any sort of power imbalance,
we would argue that it is not going to be effective, particularly for
women. [81]
9.68 Children are affected by the length of time cases may take, as well
as by the acrimonious nature of disputes. They may also be affected by
the absence of funding for review of contact issues; in some cases, this
may mean that children are being exposed to violence, abuse, and sexual
assault. [82] Where funding runs out, even
for separate representation, the needs of the child may not be met. [83]
In all cases, this may lead to long term adverse effects, both for the
child or children and the community generally. [84]
9.69 Lastly, and very importantly, if property matters are not effectively
resolved, there may be an increase in homelessness or inadequate accommodation.
Effects on people charged with criminal offences
9.70 Evidence provided to the Committee suggested that persons charged
with crimes could often face extremely difficult situations, and that
the nature of the guidelines relating to criminal matters could mean there
was limited access to legal services, including legal aid. Witnesses noted
that while there was generally a good understanding by the public of some
aspects of insufficient funding for criminal cases, they might be unaware
of the other effects on those who have been charged:
The corollary implication of Dietrich is that there are people who are
charged with criminal offences and who are obliged to bring a Dietrich
application because they cannot afford to pay for representation and it
would be unfair to go on unrepresented. They spend a considerable time,
if not the rest of their lives, with the stigma of a charge hanging over
their heads because, although a Dietrich is called a permanent stay, a
permanent stay is never forever. So until to bring a prosecution actually
becomes abusive, they remain in this limbo land of, `My trial simply can't
go on because there's not enough money.' [85]
9.71 In cases where a person may not have been adequately represented
and pleads guilty to a charge, they may then have a greater risk of being
jailed if they are charged on a second occasion. [86]
This is not necessarily in the best interests of the community, and conducive
to `a terribly divisive and eroding mentality to have in our community.'
[87]
9.72 Another issue relating to the funding for Commonwealth matters was
the discrepancy in the caps for civil and criminal matters and the belief
that criminal cases could reduce the amount of funding available for matters
such as family law. [88] The perception of
some members of the community was that there was a disproportionate amount
of funding going to men (as more likely to be involved in criminal matters)
than to women, who were more likely to be seeking assistance in family
law matters. [89] However, it was also pointed
out by National Legal Aid that while substantial funding went on criminal
cases, the more complex family law matters also consumed high levels of
aid. [90]
Effects on the community
9.73 In discussing the impact of the changes to legal aid, the Law Council
of Australia noted that these could have a substantial effect on the community's
perceptions of itself and its role in society. For many reasons, the general
social perception of some failings of the legal system may have a limited
impact – the community is unsympathetic to individuals in particular
situations and thereby has less interest in the broader principles of
justice. However, it not appropriate for government to ignore these needs:
We think there is a perennial social problem that certain of the indispensable
facilities related to the administration of justice are not popular in
terms of mass sentiment in favour of money being spent on them. …
it is for government to show a lead here, rather than to be required to
be prodded by agonising stories of individuals in a terrible plight. …
Accused persons are very rarely popular. ... But the value of a fair trial,
and also the sheer pitiful state that somebody who is unrepresented against
a state prosecution presents, is something which should evoke a financial
response from governments without needing to see truly dreadful spectacles.
[91]
9.74 Many witnesses to the Committee spoke of the common perception that
it was impossible to get legal aid. [92] They
referred to the cynicism that resulted: `there is almost a self-perpetuating
cynicism developing amongst members of the community that they do not
expect either themselves or members of their community to get justice'.
[93] As quoted in paragraph 4.29 above, the
Legal Services Commission of South Australia advised the Committee that
the public perception was one of incredulity, and of difficulty in comprehending
that a meritorious case was not going to get any assistance.
9.75 One impact of the changes to the broader legal system was believed
to be the perception of society that some matters were not worth prosecuting:
We already have a situation in South Australia where we have what I would
term a cost-benefit prosecution scenario. That is where a law appears
to be broken. The first thing is to see in the prosecutions branch whether
you have a case that is likely to get a conviction up and only then might
you proceed with prosecution. There are serious consequences for that
kind of approach, I believe, if you are going to hold up a rule of law
in a community. We cannot afford to have laws which are addressed only
if we can afford to address them. [94]
9.76 A further development of this point was outlined by the Law Council
of Australia which believed that the failure to address real funding issues
could lead to a major change in the perceptions of the community not only
about trials proceeding within a reasonable period of time, but, more
importantly, whether principles such as a right to a fair trial would
be maintained:
hard evidence of that kind of difficulty will come only when some wretch
who is accused finds himself or herself unrepresented in a truly wretched
position with dreadfully serious charges and with the relatively enormous
resources of the state prosecuting, and at the same time the great social
need for crime which ought to be tried so that the guilty are convicted
and punished. … How many do you need, bearing in mind the real horror
of that kind of thing occurring in the administration of justice at the
end of the 20th century in Australia? [95]
9.77 Another impact of substantial significance is that, by granting
the power of deciding what is likely to be a successful case, or a case
with wider public benefit (as in discrimination issues) to a legal aid
commission, the government is moving a crucial authority and responsibility
away from a court or a tribunal.
9.78 It is recognised that some assessment of merits is always necessary
in determining funding. However, this assessment must not imperceptibly
move towards a virtual decision of guilt or innocence. In particular the
Committee notes with concern the cavalier assessment that funding won't
be available unless people have a real risk of receiving a jail sentence.
Given that some people without legal assistance of an appropriate nature
may run a serious risk of jail because of a poor presentation in court,
or inadequate preparation, or because they feel it is simpler to plead
guilty than try to defend themselves, a custodial sentence or a conviction
may be a serious risk. The Committee believes that this type of risk is
being imposed on those most in need, and it is not a risk which the ordinarily
prudent self funding litigant may have to face.
9.79 A further effect of the lack of access to legal services was the
lack of participation in a crucial part of society. The NSW Environmental
Defender's Office, pointing out the interest of the public in environmental
issues, stated that active participation was essential:
Environmental decisions raise political public policy issues and democratic
principles call for public participation, even when that participation
involves litigation.
Surely, the Government should be supporting the litigation activities
of public interest environmental lawyers and their clients, not proscribing
them by choking off their funding. [96]
9.80 The Committee finds that the access of Australians to justice is
being affected at several levels. As the means test is lowered in real
terms and a stricter approach is taken to the merits test, the inevitable
consequence is that the overall number of Australians who can qualify
for legal aid is decreasing as a percentage of the population.
9.81 The Committee has also found that there is a strong likelihood that
the severely restricted availability of legal aid has its greatest impact
on the most disadvantaged. Thus, while witnesses commented on the fact
that lower to middle income Australians also had little chance of affording
legal services at all, those in the income bracket which had traditionally
had some access to legal aid, were now finding that they either missed
out on funding altogether, or had insufficient funding to conduct a matter
satisfactorily. [97]
What we are experiencing is that it is the most disadvantaged at the
bottom that continue not to be served because they are not accessing existing
services or they get dropped off because people are overworked and do
not have the time to take the type of innovative approach that is required
in order to reach those sectors of the community. [98]
9.82 The Committee shares the concern of some witnesses to the inquiry
over the effects of the changes to the legal aid system on Australian
society as a whole. It is clear from numerous submissions that the legal
aid system in Australia is fundamentally incapable of providing access
to justice for an increasing number of Australians. This situation has
significant implications for the future of many in our society, and the
values central to a liberal democracy. As the National Association of
Community Legal Centres put it:
The rationale for legal aid arises directly out of the role that the
legal system plays in Australian democratic society. The legal system
is both the means by which democratically elected governments regulate
society in the interests of all citizens and the means by which all citizens
can ensure that they are able to exercise their rights, carry out their
responsibilities, hold others accountable to the law, and receive fair
and equitable treatment as citizens. [99]
9.83 A lack of effective access to justice leads inevitably to the marginalisation
of the law and to increasing irrelevance of the core democratic institutions.
It is not overly dramatic to assert that, legal aid is critical to the
maintenance of justice and the rule of law, and ultimately, democracy.
This point was strongly put to the Committee by a representative of the
Youth Legal Service (WA):
If we don't have an effective justice system, what are those consequences
going to be? In the event that public funding has decreased for a public
road system, we see the roads disintegrate. There is a visible effect.
In the event of insufficient funding for our health system, we see a real
effect in terms of the health of Australians.
With cuts to a court system, to a justice system, there are effects but
they are less visible. They are effects that I think are more long term;
they have to do with the confidence that citizens have in the rule of
law within their society. I think that is fundamental and I think they
are concerns that need to be addressed. Although they are big picture,
they are certainly issues that underline the considerations that this
committee is addressing. [100]
Footnotes
[1] Transcript of Evidence, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 1599.
[2] See above, Chapter 4.
[3] Submission No. 126, Law Council of
Australia, p. 21.
[4] Transcript of Evidence, Family Law
Practitioners Association, p. 1786. See also para. 4.20 above.
[5] See below, paragraphs 9.71-9.81.
[6] The Commonwealth Government's plans to reduce
the avenue for appeals in a number of areas will effectively limit the
opportunities for individuals to challenge various decisions. This proposed
change, in conjunction with the limited funding available through legal
aid for various issues, will presumably affect community expectations
and demand.
[7] Submission No. 44C, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 19.
[8] Transcript of Evidence, Kingsford
Legal Centre, p. 1710.
[9] Submission No. 144, Newcastle Legal
Centre, pp. 4-5 and Transcript of Evidence, Newcastle Legal Centre,
pp. 1394-5, 1397-8.
[10] In many cases these may come under state
rather than Commonwealth law, and include consumer and credit issues,
victim's compensation, tenancy, domestic violence, and discrimination:
Submission No. 185, Campbelltown Legal Centre, pp. 4-5.
[11] Submission No. 181C, Environmental
Defender's Office (NSW), p. 3.
[12] See above, para. 4.13.
[13] Submission No. 127G, Attorney-General's
Department, p. 4.
[14] See for example, Transcript of Evidence,
Villamanta Legal Service, pp 1434, 1437-8. Villamanta Legal Service is
funded through the Commonwealth Department of Health. See also Transcript
of Evidence, Mental Health Law Service, p. 1552 on the provision by
Western Australia of funding to meet the demand for legal services such
as advocacy service resulting from state mental health legislation. For
the information received by the Committee on services provided by states
and territories, see Appendix 7.
[15] Transcript of Evidence, The Aged-care
Rights Service, p. 1704.
[16] Transcript of Evidence, Older Persons
Action Centre, p. 1444.
[17] Transcript of Evidence, Kingsford
Legal Centre, p. 1702.
[18] Submission No. 109A, Women's Legal
Resource Group, p. 6.
[19] Transcript of Evidence, Villamanta
Legal Service, pp. 1433-4.
[20] Submission No. 185, Campbelltown
Legal Centre, p. 2.
[21] Transcript of Evidence, Campbelltown
Legal Centre, p. 1376. The submission from the Campbelltown Legal Centre
referred to the provision of interpreters by the NSW Ethnic Affairs Commission
and stated (p. 6): On 1 February 1998 the NSW EAC implemented a policy
of no longer providing free interpreters for community legal centres for
Commonwealth matters. We feel that this is a direct result of the State/Federal
dispute regarding legal aid. The Commonwealth currently only provides
a telephone interpreter service and provides only 23 free interpreters
for appointments at services state wide per day. This is for all services,
not just legal services. There is at this point no likelihood of the Commonwealth
funding interpreters for Commonwealth matters. The Centre told the Committee
it had now the added burden of having to determine at the threshold whether
a matter was a Commonwealth or state one in order to determine which interpreting
service to use.
[22] Transcript of Evidence, Welfare
Rights and Advocacy Service (WA), p. 1549.
[23] Transcript of Evidence, Villamanta
Legal Service, pp. 1440-1.
[24] Submission No. 109A, Women's Legal
Resource Group Inc., p. 4.
[25] Transcript of Evidence, Women's
Legal Resource Group, p. 1467.
[26] Transcript of Evidence, Family
Court of Australia, p. 1638.
[27] Submission No. 109A, Women's Legal
Resource Group Inc., p. 5.
[28] Submission No. 35, Victoria Legal
Aid, p. 3.
[29] Transcript of Evidence, Australian
Pensioners' and Superannuants' Federation, pp. 1444, 1446.
[30] Transcript of Evidence, Older Persons
Action Centre, p. 1443.
[31] Transcript of Evidence, Administrative
Appeals Tribunal, p. 1386.
[32] Transcript of Evidence, Returned
and Services League, p. 930.
[33] Transcript of Evidence, Vietnam
Veterans' Association of Australia, p. 1421.
[34] Transcript of Evidence, Environmental
Defender's Office (NSW), p. 1368.
[35] Transcript of Evidence, Kingsford
Legal Service, p. 1710.
[36] Transcript of Evidence, Family
Court of Australia, p. 1637.
[37] Submission No. 44C, Legal Services
Commission of SA, pp. 18-20.
[38] Submission No. 44C, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 20.
[39] Submission No.126A, Law Council
of Australia, para. 2.2.
[40] Transcript of Evidence, Social
Security Appeals Tribunal, p. 1672.
[41] Transcript of Evidence, Social
Security Appeals Tribunal, p. 1673.
[42] Transcript of Evidence, Social
Security Appeals Tribunal, p. 1669.
[43] Transcript of Evidence, Administrative
Appeals Tribunal, p. 1387. In other cases, the AAT believed, it was sometimes
a disadvantage to have legal assistance: Transcript of Evidence,
p. 1386.
[44] Transcript of Evidence, Federation
of Community Legal Centres (Vic) Inc, p. 1449.
[45] Transcript of Evidence, Campbelltown
Legal Service, p. 1371.
[46] Transcript of Evidence, Family
Law Practitioners Association, pp. 1778-9.
[47] Submission No 178, Federation of
Community Legal Centres (Vic) Inc, p. 7.
[48] See Transcript of Evidence, Springvale
Community Legal Service, p. 1675; Transcript of Evidence, Family
Law Practitioners Association, pp. 1778-9.
[49] Senate Legal and Constitutional References
Committee, Inquiry into the Australian Legal Aid System: First Report,
March 1997, pp. 6, 10-11 and Second Report, June 1997, pp.
7-8. A somewhat broader definition of persons for whom the Commonwealth
has responsibility is listed in Submission No. 88, National Legal
Aid, p. 19: this definition is linked to international obligations, and
includes women, children and people in custody.
[50] The Committee commented on the issue of
international obligations in its previous reports in this inquiry. Some
witnesses did not accept that the Commonwealth government could place
responsibility for the Commonwealth person on state governments, thereby
avoiding what was perceived as international obligations: `We do not agree
with the Commonwealth trying to walk away from the Commonwealth persons
test, because there are international obligations, certainly to Aboriginal
people, and constitutional obligations as well' (Transcript of Evidence,
Legal Aid Queensland, pp. 266-7).
[51] Transcript of Evidence, Attorney-Generals
Department, p. 129.
[52] See above, para. 4.52.
[53] Submission No. 178, Federation
of Community Legal Centres (Vic) Inc, p. 7.
[54] Transcript of Evidence, Law Society
of SA, p. 1572.
[55] Transcript of Evidence, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 1600.
[56] Transcript of Evidence, Springvale
Community Legal Service, p. 1684.
[57] Transcript of Evidence, Federation
of Community Legal Centres (WA) Inc., p. 1532.
[58] Transcript of Evidence, Law Society
of SA, pp. 1566-7; Legal Services Commission of SA, pp. 1592, 1600.
[59] Submission No. 101A, Springvale
Legal Service, p. 2.
[60] Transcript of Evidence, Rural Community
Legal Service Inc, p. 1551.
[61] Transcript of Evidence, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 1610; National Legal Aid, p. 1663; Legal Aid Queensland,
pp. 1761-2.
[62] Transcript of Evidence, Federation
of Community Legal Centres, pp. 1450-1.
[63] Submission No. 178, Federation
of Community Legal Centres, p. 8.
[64] Transcript of Evidence, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 1610.
[65] Transcript of Evidence, Legal Aid
Queensland, p. 1762.
[66] Transcript of Evidence, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 1611.
[67] Transcript of Evidence, Law Society
of SA p. 1572.
[68] Transcript of Evidence, Law Society
of SA, p. 1579.
[69] Transcript of Evidence, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 1588. See Appendix 8 below for a copy of the newspaper
article.
[70] Submission No. 44C, Legal Services
Commission of SA, pp. 14-15.
[71] Submission No. 44C, Legal Services
Commission of SA, pp. 6-7. On the other hand, other apparent changes,
such as reductions in Family Court services to regional and rural areas
were seen as having been overcome by reorganisation: Transcript of
Evidence, Family Court of Australia, p. 1644.
[72] Submission No. 44C, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 7.
[73] Submission No. 178, Federation
of Community Legal Centres (Vic) Inc, p. 12.
[74] Transcript of Evidence, Law Society
of SA, p. 1573; Family Court of Australia, pp. 1639-40.
[75] Transcript of Evidence, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 1591.
[76] Transcript of Evidence, National
Council for Single Mothers and Their Children, p. 1621.
[77] Transcript of Evidence, Legal Aid
Queensland, p. 1755.
[78] Transcript of Evidence, Family
Court of Australia, p. 1634.
[79] Transcript of Evidence, Family
Court of Australia, pp. 1634-5.
[80] Transcript of Evidence, National
Council for Single Mothers and Their Children, p. 1620.
[81] Transcript of Evidence, Women's
Legal Resource Group, p. 514. See similarly Submission No. 74,
Townsville Community Legal Service, p. 4.
[82] Transcript of Evidence, National
Council for Single Mothers and Their Children, pp. 1621-2.
[83] Transcript of Evidence, Family
Court of Australia, pp. 1633-4.
[84] Submission No. 44C, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 9.
[85] Transcript of Evidence, Law Society
of SA, p. 1570.
[86] Transcript of Evidence, Law Society
of SA, p. 1571.
[87] Transcript of Evidence, Law Society
of SA, p. 1572.
[88] Transcript of Evidence, National
Legal Aid, pp. 1649-50, 1651-2.
[89] Transcript of Evidence, National
Council for Single Mothers and Their Children, p. 1620.
[90] Transcript of Evidence, National
Legal Aid, p. 1657.
[91] Transcript of Evidence, Law Council
of Australia, pp. 1313-14.
[92] Transcript of Evidence, Legal Services
Commission of SA, p. 1589.
[93] Transcript of Evidence, Law Society
of SA, p. 1572.
[94] Transcript of Evidence, National
Council for Single Mothers and Their Children, p. 1618.
[95] Transcript of Evidence, Law Council
of Australia, p. 1311.
[96] Submission No. 181C, Environmental
Defender's Office (NSW), p. 3.
[97] Transcript of Evidence, Campbelltown
Legal Centre, p. 1371.
[98] Transcript of Evidence, Campbelltown
Legal Centre, p. 1371. See similarly, Transcript of Evidence, Legal
Services Commission of SA, p. 1596.
[99] Submission No. 90, National Association
of Community Legal Centres, p. 3.
[100] Transcript of Evidence, Youth
Legal Service (WA), p. 1530.