Quinn Paul: Legal Services Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Quinn Paul: Legal Services Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:658;Page:7394] 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
: 
 Like other speakers it gives me pleasure to rise and support the Legal Services Amendment Bill. I start by joining my colleagues on both sides of the House in thanking the chair of the Justice and Electoral Committee Chester Borrows who has been singled out regularly during the week because a number of bills that very hard-working committee has considered have passed through the House this week. I think about six bills have passed this week under this very rigorous and hard-working Government which is ensuring its legislative programme is achieved on time and on spec. This bill is another that has come out of the very hard-working Justice and Electoral Committee. We should also pay tribute to the staff of the select committee who have given great service to the MPs who have been sitting in deliberations. I think it is timely that we recognise their contribution to the work of the select committee. 
I will also deal with a couple of issues. I will put the bill in perspective and remind members that the bill aims to do two or three things. Firstly it aims to remove eligibility testing requirements for legal aid for victims who are to attend coronial inquests or Parole Board hearings or for the making of victims’ claims. Secondly the bill aims to grant the Legal Services Agency the discretion to waiver its right to recover legal aid debts where individual circumstances mean enforcement would cause serious hardship or would be uneconomic or it would just be equitable not to enforce the debt. Thirdly the bill aims to create the power to make regulations to exempt specific classes of people or proceedings from eligibility restrictions or repayment obligations. 
I will reflect for a moment on that final purpose. Lianne Dalziel in her contribution to this debate made reference to the fact that she would be introducing a Supplementary Order Paper because she wanted the entitlements that arise out of this bill to cover additional situations. Put simply this particular purpose will enable us to clip on—if I can use that phrase—additional activities to this bill should a circumstance eventuate that was not envisaged at this second reading. Should something new come along under this purpose of the bill the Government will be able to add that new circumstance by regulation in order to contribute to meeting the costs. 
I do not intend to go through the bill clause by clause. I will instead turn to examples of the services that might be clipped on going forward. We received six submissions in total and all of them as would be expected supported the bill. Suggestions were made during the course of submissions of areas that might be considered under this bill. They were things like providing support to victims of crime so that they are able to have representation during the criminal justice process. Another example of contribution to costs was through the restorative justice process particularly during the sentencing period. A third area was giving assistance for private prosecutions. Those were examples of areas that submitters felt might also be covered with the additional support that was envisaged under this bill for the specific areas that have been nominated. 
That takes me to the fact that this Government has made commitments across a number of areas in terms of support for victims of crime. Although we have not covered some of the suggestions that I have just canvassed which were made by submitters we have made other contributions towards meeting the costs of victims of crime. One of those bills the Sentencing (Offender Levy) Amendment Bill was passed last night. It will be enacted on its Royal assent which I think is in 20 days. I ask Grant whether that is right; it is. That bill was just another example. This Government is putting in place a series of building blocks that will assist victims of crime. We do not claim that we can in one fell swoop meet all the demands and all the requirements out there because that could be very onerous on the State. We are trying to put in place some support because this is a very difficult time for victims of crime. The Sentencing (Offender Levy) Amendment Bill was passed yesterday evening and I am pleased to note for the record that in a rare show of unanimity the whole House supported the bill through its third reading. I think in this area the whole House speaks as one in terms of providing support services to victims of crime. 
It gives me great pleasure to have the opportunity to speak to this very worthwhile bill and I look forward to sharing with the House the specific aspects of the clauses as we go through the Committee stage so that everyone gets a full working knowledge of the bill’s intent. Thank you. 
Bill read a second time.