Parker David: Judicature Modernisation Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Judicature Modernisation Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1731. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour): One of the great mysteries of the House today has been why the computer system keeps going down. Well if you see the length of this bill that people might have printed off—1226 pages long—maybe this is the reason.Just before I commence my comments on the Judicature Modernisation Bill can I just refer to one of the matters that arise from Jacqui Dean’s contribution. I agree with what Jacqui Dean was saying in respect of remand appearances and things being made simpler through electronic means. I will not traverse some of the civil liberties that were just about infringed by the Government’s attempt to extend that to hearings of fact where people could potentially lose their right to appear in defence of their own trial because we did resolve that in this House—but her comments did remind me that I think we have an aberrant corrections system when you create enormous prisons and site them in rural areas so that you have got many hundreds if not a thousand prisoners dislocated from the towns and cities whence they come and put into a little rural area like Milton for example. As a consequence the likely outcome when it comes to reintegration of them into the community is worse because their families have had less contact with them while they are in prison their friends and support networks have not been there and it is harder to integrate them into work because there is not much work in those rural areas. I think it is one of the unresolved issues that we have got in New Zealand—this idea that we should have these enormous prisons sited in rural areas rather than smaller institutions closer to the places where prisoners come from.Anyway if I turn to this bill the Judicature Modernisation Bill is a good thing. It is housekeeping legislation bringing the laws up to date and standardising some of the rules between some of the senior courts and promulgating appropriate legislation for the District Court as well. But it does absolutely nothing to improve access to justice. Unless you have access to justice that is practical then the courts do not meet their social function which is to avoid violence but allow for the just settlement of disputes. Disputes sometimes arise between well-meaning people on each side who cannot agree. Those disputes need to be settled. Also you have disputes where you have powerful or overbearing people on one side and weak and vulnerable people on the other side and our courts need to be accessible to the weak and the vulnerable in order to protect their positions. If you do not have that then you actually lose respect for the rule of law as well as encourage inappropriate uncivil action in society. We call them civil procedures because they are meant to be civil and they are meant to avoid uncivil behaviour.We have got problems right across the Western World with access to justice but New Zealand is no different and it is getting worse in New Zealand. The period that people stand on remand before they get into a criminal process is far too long in New Zealand. People who are not guilty but are on remand are held in custody longer than they should. People who are guilty should be brought to justice and convicted earlier. Witnesses should not have to suffer the loss of memory that happens with time through long processes.In the criminal justice system now because of changes to the way in which the prosecutorial services through Crown prosecutors’ offices are being funded we have got plea bargaining in a way that we never used to have in New Zealand a decade ago and it is wrong. We now have lawyers who know that they will get a better deal the longer they wait in the process in respect of guilty defendants whom they are representing because the prosecutors have not got enough money to prosecute them. We have now got serious assaults in New Zealand being categorised as minor assaults because they can get away with that in the plea bargain and that is wrong.So I would like to see the Government spending a bit more money on the courts. I think it is one of the duties of Government to make sure our courts are effective. That is not to say that money is the cure to all of these things but it is relevant.The civil arena is even worse. Did you know that the maximum income you can have to get legal aid in the civil courts is $22366 gross income for a single person and $34420 of family income for a family with one child? There is virtually no one in New Zealand who is employed who is entitled to legal aid but there are lots of people who are employed who cannot afford to fund a lawyer upfront. As a consequence there are lots of things that are unjust in New Zealand that are not litigated and that is wrong too—that is wrong too. That is the case not just in the Family Court—and there are some innovations in the Family Court that I do not have time to go into that I disagree with as well—but in the civil courts. It is wrong.We now have the rule of law being broken down because contracts cannot be enforced. If you cannot rely upon your contract being enforceable for quite significant sums well again you are undermining the rule of law. These points were made by Her Honour Justice Helen Winkelmann in a speech that my colleague Jacinda Ardern mentioned which she gave at the Ethel Benjamin Address on 7 November last year which was about access to justice. She also made the point that court fees have become excessive and this is the legislation that provides effectively for the setting of those fees. Did you know that in the simplest of cases that go to the High Court by the time you have a straightforward proceeding involving a hearing of 1 day the court fees alone—this is not the solicitor’s fees—paid to the Crown total $6700? It is amongst the highest rates in the world—amongst the highest rates in the world. Again this is a block to access to justice and I do not think we have got the balance right here. This is I am told about 50 percent higher than the comparable fees in the United Kingdom and that is a country that I think has a fine record of upholding justice.One of the other consequences when you do not have accessible cost-effective access to judges is you get a lot of people actually not even pursuing their rights but other people do pursue their rights and defend themselves personally in court. There has been an incredible rise in the number of people who represent themselves in court. Justice Winkelmann says of the 228 active civil files in the Court of Appeal 56—that is about a quarter—involve unrepresented litigants. In the Auckland High Court 40 percent of all judicial review cases have one or more unrepresented litigants. What happens as a consequence of this is it is incredibly inefficient in the courts. It is incredibly inefficient because unrepresented litigants do not know how to prosecute their rights. It takes a lot longer for the judge. The judges sometimes have to conflict themselves. We have an adversarial system. The judge is not meant to be helping either of the parties and yet the judge is either having to help one of the parties or asking counsel for the other side to help the party. If you are the other side you do not think you should have to pay for your own lawyer as well as paying your own lawyer to help the other side.So all of these problems relating to access to justice are coming home to roost in New Zealand. As a consequence I think most people in New Zealand do not think our courts are something that they can afford to use. That is wrong. For me the courts are not serving their social purpose.Where does the answer lie? The answer lies a wee bit in a little bit more money from the Government. It also lies in improved lawyer behaviour judges taking control of their courts and stopping them from wasting too much time and some shorter judgments. There are too many judgments that read like academic treatises at the moment despite appeal rights. Rely on appeal rights for things that go wrong rather than academic treatises at first instance. I am sad to say that this bill does absolutely nothing—nothing—in respect of those problems that I have categorised in respect of access to justice in New Zealand.