Smith Murray: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Smith Murray: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:22022] 
MURRAY SMITH (United Future) 
: 
 Our justice sector is in crisis. When the Justice and Electoral Committee found that out during our review of the estimates a number of the members were like me shocked to find that this crisis had been hidden by both the National and the Labour Governments over a period of some 15 years. 
When we did the financial review which we commenced at the end of last year we interviewed the Ministry of Justice. Its officials advised us that they had a plan for a baseline review of the justice sector and that they had established a team to undertake a comprehensive review of the ministry’s capability and to examine whether baseline funding was adequate for the delivery of services. As we reported in our published report at that time they told us that the main reasons for that review were the need to meet new expectations following the merger of the Department for Courts with the Ministry of Justice and the fact that the baseline funding of the Department for Courts had not been reviewed since its inception in 1995. 
We bought that line because we were aware that the merger had occurred recently and we felt it was reasonable to give the Ministry of Justice a bit of time for this situation to settle down. It now transpires that there were in fact a lot of more serious issues going on and it was not until that review was published and we looked into the estimates that we discovered just how serious the situation was. 
Although we interviewed Ministry of Justice officials on 10 November 2004 and the baseline review was completed on 17 December 2004—a mere 1 month later—it is interesting that a copy was not provided to the Justice and Electoral Committee until we undertook this review and little was said publicly. It was something that the Government kept very much under wraps because of its contents. The Audit Office was quick in its report to us on the estimates to point out the serious nature of some of the comments made in the baseline review that revealed the crisis situation we are in. 
Ministry officials then told us that effectively the reasons for the baseline review were growing delays in case disposal increased concerns from the judiciary about the level of judicial support concerns about the information technology infrastructure of Vote Courts visible deterioration in many court buildings and broader problems in providing certainty to Ministers about workloads and associated costs. It was a very different story from the one we had been given when we looked at the financial review. 
These are some of the comments that came out of the financial review. “Workload demand is unrealistically high for the current level of resourcing in the policy areas of the Ministry.” We were told that the policy area was under a lot of stress. The review continued: “All work remains at a reactive level and medium-term thinking and policy development has been sacrificed to the time pressures of immediate requirements.” I would point out the language that is used. Normally in a review we see fairly read-between-the-lines types of statements that are more passive; the use of terms like “sacrifice” shows just how serious the situation is. The review stated: “The quality of policy work is reflected in the increasing nature of demand but has suffered in some areas from the ongoing time pressures and the need to constantly juggle resources. The functions of the policy group are broad and encompass some operational functions as well as policy work. This means essentially that a low resource base is spread across a wide front creating a thinness in almost all areas.” It stated: “There are unmet requirements for work in two areas—to complete the general policy work programme and medium term strategic policy development.” It also stated: “Currently the Ministry does not have the capability or capacity to enable it to lead sector strategy planning monitoring and reporting. Current resourcing is one FTE which has resulted in progress being intermittent based on scant analysis and very limited in terms of sector collaboration.” 
We on the Justice and Electoral Committee had been told that the Ministry of Justice had accepted a leadership role in terms of the sector and that it would lead sector strategy planning monitoring and reporting. We then found that there was one full-time equivalent doing it and that its ability to do it was severely compromised. 
I conclude by saying that these issues are particularly serious and it is time we looked seriously at this whole area of the justice ministry.