McKee NicoleNICOLE McKEE (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I stand on behalf of the ACT Party to speak to the Family Court (Family Court Associates) Legislation Bill. It looks like for the Minister it's support around the House this evening for what is a necessary bill. But just like our National Party colleagues we do have a few little concerns. I think that we can sort these out through the select committee process but I will outline what some of those are today.As I said we definitely do need to address the issue that we have in the Family Court and regardless of who is in Government at the day this actually goes right back to 2014 and before then. What we are seeing is an average age of Family Court applications sitting in the court process scene for about 175 days. When we have defended Care of Children Act applications averaging 384 days to clear then we do know we certainly must have a problem. That is 69 percent of those Care of Children Act defended cases that have been sitting for more than 384 days.So the Ministry of Justice wants to implement a Family Court Associate role and they have stated that they believe this will clear up 25 percent of judges' administration time allowing judges to concentrate on their core responsibilities and having the Family Court move faster in their processes.One of the questions we have is that while this is needed is that the actual solution that's going to achieve the outcomes that we all need to see which is a Family Court process that moves faster and for the benefit of both the applicants and the children involved. The question is there because no reviews have been done to determine the causes of the delays. So we're looking at a report from 2014 a panel that was implemented in May 2018 that again referred another report in June 2019—not able at that time I'm sure to fully assess the impact of COVID on our court systems.So the panel has made these recommendations—that's Te Korowai Ture ā-Whānau panel. But we do ask: where's the added and updated advice since the 2014 report and since May 2018 when the panel was put together? Where's the analysis to say that the problems identified will actually be solved by this approach and by when and what are the key performance indicators so that we can measure how this is working and if it actually is working and how we can improve it if need be?But let's get back to our intent which is to support this bill because it's about improving the outcomes for those that are participating in the Family Court process particularly for the children. This omnibus bill will allow a Family Court Associate to hold powers additional to that of a court registrar with some of the functions and powers of a Family Court judge. They'll be making determinations involving quite a large number of Acts and I think this is quite significant.I won't go through all of the years but I'll very briefly let you know that it's the Adoption Act the Care of Children Act the Child Support Act the Family Proceedings Act the Family Violence Act the Marriage Act the Oranga Tamariki Act the Property (Relationships) Act the Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act and the Status of Children Act. So by getting these associates involved across all of these areas I expect we will see—or I hope that we will see—a significant movement in the number of cases so that we are no longer having some waiting 384 days on average just to be processed.The intent is that they—they" being the Family Court Associate—will make many of the administrative decisions especially those at the beginning of or the early stages of proceedings but not the substantive decisions as the social significance and their impacts on human rights along with the sheer complexity of decisions need a more learned appraisal.So I do wonder then why is it within the bill that it states that if there is no High Court judge District Court judge or Family Court judge available in an emergency to make decisions that a Family Court Associate will step in at that stage. So that's probably me just needing to have a bit more information on that one.This bill's been brought to the House to deal with the delays. However it appears to be more like a permanent adjustment rather than just dealing with the delays. That may not be a bad thing but I do wonder around the appointments of the Family Court Associate.We understand that there'll be four to six lawyers in year one and a further six to seven lawyers in two years after that. But the regulatory impact statement actually states that the judiciary and the family law section are confident that there are enough Family Court lawyers to fill these roles. They've actually gone on to say that there's 173 active lawyers at the moment with 10 to 15 years' experience. But the ministry itself is not so confident that those people will be wanting or willing to actually step up as a Family Court Associate. So we're looking at a very small number of associates but 173 lawyers to choose from whereas the bill itself is actually only seeking to appoint any barrister or solicitor with seven years' experience and a current practising certificate as someone who could be appointed as a Family Court Associate. So my reading of this is they don't even need to have any Family Court experience and I think that that's wrong. So I think that's another issue that we will need to delve into once we get to select committee.Seeing as this is a fixed term—albeit a rather long one at seven years—why aren't we ensuring that those with the skills are utilised in the Family Court experience? ACT thinks that this is important and here's why: because one of the main aspects about our Family Court is the without notice applications. They're essential to protect our kids. They're essential to make sure that they're a tool that's available for child abuse or neglect in emergency situations. But the without notice applications can also take a very long time to process—as I mentioned earlier 384 days on average. This is time that you can't make up as a family; it's time that you cannot make up as a parent. The strain is real and it's damaging especially when one parent is prevented from visitation rights with a child for very long extended periods of time.Young 25-year-old parent Sam took his own life due to his frustrations with the system leaving a note that said "Fix the Family Court." Another father Jono has waited three years for his case to be heard. He said he's going to give up on the relationship with his daughter because he simply can't handle the strain anymore. His partner Lily explained "He jumped over barrier after barrier until he can't jump anymore and people say he walked away. No he didn't walk away. He was pushed out of her life."If this is the outcome for the parents going through the Family Court system what the heck is happening to our kids? Parents and children alike are facing adverse health impacts suicidal tendencies and they're broke. So we must put in the criteria that the Family Court experienced by those barristers and solicitors with current practising certificates is a necessity because of the type of situations that we are dealing with in the Family Court and the emotion that has played out with these family members.So in summary we do support this bill. We think that it's a great idea and we need to be able to move through the Family Court process faster. But we expect experience needs to be imported before the appointment of the Family Court Associates. We'd like to see how the success is going to be measured so we make sure we're on the right track and can remain on that track in the future. So in this first instance we will support and we will work hard with the Justice Committee to make sure that it's fit for purpose and we can continue down this route. Thank you."