Huo RaymondRAYMOND HUO (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. These must be the ninth or 10th bills that the Justice Committee has sent back to the House. It is very difficult to see the exact number because some of the bills were divided into different bills so it's very hard to tell the exact number which this extraordinarily busy Justice Committee has sent back to the House. We have had about 18 bills in addition to inquiries financial annual reviews and Estimates. I want to follow the Minister and thank our officials advisers and submitters. I thank them for their knowledge experience and input. The Justice Committee received 48 written submissions and heard 15 oral submissions. The submissions came from the judiciary professional organisations and interested groups and individuals. Many of the points raised by those submitters are valuable to us not only on these particular bills but also on other bills as well. For instance the Justice Committee is currently considering the Privacy Bill. One point raised so far concerns the jurisdictional aspects between the Privacy Commissioner and the Human Rights Review Tribunal. That would bring us to an issue that the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Bill seeks to address which is the significant case backlog that has been building up over the past years and as such what kind of impact it may have with regard to the tribunal's roles and functions in relation to the Privacy Bill etc. The issue relating to case backlog has existed for a while now. Since 2015 the number of claims filed with the tribunal has exceeded its resources. The chairman Rodger Haines QC made a very powerful submission. We are very glad to report that through the changes under this bill we will get what he described as artificial restrictions in the Human Rights Act 1993 addressed. Another example that I'd like to cite—SPEAKER: Order! I apologise for interrupting the member but it's kai time. Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.RAYMOND HUO: Another example that I'd like to cite is the Government's Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 134 relating to inserting a new Subpart 9A in Part 4 of the Courts Matters Bill. The SOP amends the Senior Courts Act 2016 to restore the ability of a single Court of Appeal judge to decide minor contested matters in civil cases instead of having three Court of Appeal judges to decide cases on those applications. The third example is concerning the use of audiovisual facilities. In the modern era of smartphones computers and social media it's common sense—isn't it—for the courts to be equipped and adapted to the reality. Part 4 amends the Courts (Remote Participation) Act to enable judicial officers and court registrars to allow any participation in a criminal procedural hearing via audiovisual link (AVL) technology if AVL is available and its use is not contrary to the interests of justice. This will also enable participants such as lawyers and witnesses to appear via AVL facilities during criminal procedural hearings. The final example I wish to cite is relating to our jury service and some language issues that potential jurors may have experienced. The Juries Act will be amended to authorise court registrars to defer jury service for potential jurors who are not confident in their understanding of the English language. These two bills introduce a large number of amendments that will help improve people's experience with courts and tribunals. Efficiency business efficacy productivity and improved users' experience are the keywords and the two bills will contribute to a modern efficient and effective courts and tribunals system. Thank you.