Bennett David: Legal Services Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Bennett David: Legal Services Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:630;Page:2230] 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 Once again we are talking about the title and commencement date of legislation. The bill in this case is the Legal Services Amendment Bill (No 2). The title relates to the Legal Services Act 2000 which is the principal Act and to the amendments in this bill. As National members have so eloquently said in the debates on this legislation over the last week or so we do not have any fundamental problem with legal aid. Our concerns relate to the ability for individuals who are in the most vulnerable state to get access to efficient and equitable legal aid so that they are represented to the level they should be in court proceedings. 
One may ask why that is so important. It is important because people’s lives are at stake. These are people who are generally reliant on the Government to be involved at that stage in their lives. Normally they have come into turmoil or something they had not anticipated has gone wrong and they need to deal with it. A lot of the time we say that our welfare system will look after people in their time of need but for some people such a situation will probably be their biggest time of need because it is something they never saw coming. They may have got into a situation that was not right for them and did not know how to react and now they have to face the consequences. 
Legal services are important in that situation. This bill is an attempt to deal with that situation. However it is an attempt that National sees some major holes in. The two biggest problems are first that the bill does not really deal with a framework for review of legal service payments. Those engaged in providing legal aid do not know when they will get a review of their fees or the quantum of any review and that potentially creates a situation whereby people will not want to engage in that work. The people who can assist those most in need of assistance are not willing to do so because potentially they will not get paid at the level they could enjoy doing other work. They also do not know how secure their work is. 
That creates a lot of issues for the Government which needs to provide those services. How do we provide a mechanism so that the providers of legal aid services are willing to do so? Probably the fundamental problem in this legislation is that there is no process there. It has been said only that there will be a review—that was said in this Chamber during one of the readings of the bill. There is no formal process; there is no certainty. Legal aid providers do not really know what their situation will be in the future. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: How many reviews have they had? 
DAVID BENNETT 
: Well there need to be more reviews. A review is an essential part of government and this is one area that quite obviously could be reviewed. It would be interesting to see a review. Would anyone on the other side of the Chamber be able to review this area? That is the other question. No I do not think they could. They might employ someone to review it and then pay some major fees to the public service or the private sector. Consultants would enjoy the review process. It could be like the campaign—we could get Treasury to review it. But then we could not tell anyone what Treasury said—we would have to keep it quiet. But there needs to be some kind of review some kind of formal process so that individuals who are representing people know the situation and know how they can get an equitable payment for their services. 
 Although this bill covers an area where there is no real debate amongst the political parties about the need to have legal aid and the title of the Legal Services Amendment Bill (No 2) covers an area that there is no debate over the issue is in regard to how that is made to happen. We do not see this bill achieving the goals of its stated intention. Clause 1 “Title” mentions the Legal Services Amendment Act and the Legal Services Act 2000. To provide legal services one has to pay people. We do not see a payment mechanism in the bill to enable that to happen.