Roberts AngelaANGELA ROBERTS (Labour): I'm pleased to be taking a call on the Family Court (Supporting Children in Court) Legislation Bill. I'd like to reassure the member from the other side of the House who was concerned that there was inadequate consultation with the experts around this bill. I'm really really pleased that the Justice Committee had access to Dr Emily Henderson who is not only a criminal court academic and reformer but a Family Court lawyer and an expert in child witness processes. The select committee can be very confident that they had very sound world-class advice about the best way to resolve the issues that this bill is attempting to resolve.I discussed this bill with her and she reminded me that it is part of a reset of the Family Court which as a review by the Minister Andrew Little in 2019 discovered has become unbalanced overstrained and not responsive especially to the needs of tamariki Māori. This bill actually reinforces and strengthens responsibilities on professionals lawyers and mediators to respect and facilitate children's voices in disputes over their care. That is the heart of this matter: enabling our children's voices to be heard. There is nothing more powerful to a young person than feeling that they have some control over their lives and when they don't it can be devastating.It also reinforces and strengthens lawyers' responsibilities to seek to resolve cases quickly fairly and cost-efficiently but also safely because in many cases childcare disputes involve violence and abuse which create extreme imbalances between parents' bargaining power. This is why the Opposition are wrong to criticise the bill as they do in their alternative report for placing too much faith in lawyers. In a place like the Family Court where disparities in power are so common lawyers are a vital tool to achieve some sort of parity and rebalancing and enable disempowered people to access justice—our most vulnerable our children and women to have a voice and to get a successful outcome. This isn't to disparage alternative dispute resolutions but most cases which land in the courts require the greatest of expertise and strong representation.She reminded me how the changes that Collins made in 2014 which cut lawyers from the early stages of proceedings—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! The member will refer to another member by their full name.ANGELA ROBERTS: I beg your pardon. There were cuts made and what happened is the rate of emergency applications moved from 30 percent to 70 percent of all applications reversing the previous proportions. This wasn't because lawyers were trying to keep work; in fact most Family Court lawyers are hugely oversubscribed. What it did—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! I'm sorry to interrupt the member but I was waiting for the member to correct her speech.ANGELA ROBERTS: Oh I beg your pardon—for Judith Collins. I was referring to the Hon Judith Collins and her reforms.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you.ANGELA ROBERTS: Thank you for your support and advice to get it right. So the changes have been really negative and most Family Court lawyers the use of them the need for them it reflects client anxiety about self-representation in such stressful times.International studies in the UK the US and Australia show lawyers in the Family Court shorten cases promote resolution and cut costs not the other way round. Like I say when you look to the evidence and you're looking for solutions and you're wanting to improve outcomes for our most vulnerable then you do what the evidence says is sensible. There's no doubt the Family Court is strained and needs a reset but it needs to recognise lawyers as part of the solution and to this end this bill refocuses and reinforces lawyers on their responsibilities to resolve cases efficiently and fairly and also safely. That's what we all want to do: make sure that the outcomes are best for our most vulnerable. So I commend this bill to the House.