Pillay Lynne: Legal Services Bill — First Reading 
Pillay Lynne: Legal Services Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13520] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour) 
: 
 I start by acknowledging all the good lawyers out there who undertake legal aid and represent— 
Paul Quinn 
: Simon. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: No I do not mean Simon Bridges whom that member has pointed out. I will return to talking about the lawyers who have contributed much to the criminal justice system. As I think Simon Bridges mentioned in one part of his speech the lawyers causing the problems that have been identified by the review are very much in the minority. But if we look at the criminal justice system and uphold very strongly the principle of access to justice no matter how small the minority is we can see that very serious misdemeanours have happened. 
If we look very briefly at the review we see that one of its findings was that some 200 lawyers were seen to be rorting the system. Certainly that matter should be of great concern not only to all members of this House but also to the people who use the system. There were top-up payments from clients over and above what the Legal Services Agency had provided. That is absolutely abhorrent. Access to legal aid is very much designed for the people who are simply not able to afford access to justice. That is the whole principle of the system so to demand a top-up payment is totally unacceptable. 
There was some concern that complaints made to the Law Society about dishonest behaviour were not acted upon and certainly that should not have happened. Unpreparedness was also an issue. Legal aid lawyers have been turning up to represent clients and they have not been prepared. That is unacceptable. A number of other issues were identified. In particular there was no control over the legal aid system in terms of the legal profession and effectively no independent oversight. That is of real concern. 
I hasten to add that those concerns were in the minority but they were still concerns. If we look at our legal aid system we see that everyone in New Zealand wants to see the best bang for the taxpayer buck in that investment and to have that system rorted in any way shape or form is not acceptable. 
I note that Dame Margaret Bazley’s recommendations included raising the barrier for entry into the legal aid system. Only lawyers with competence and integrity should be able to work in legal aid. That is a given. It is really important. Where it is seen that lawyers are incompetent or dishonest or both and where there is concern about the work that they are doing— 
Hone Harawira 
: Or all of the above. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: —or all of the above as the member said—there is a mechanism under this bill whereby those lawyers will be ejected from the legal aid system. They will not continue to underperform or at worst act dishonestly. 
The bill also clarifies the roles and responsibilities of the two regulators with an interest in this area: the Legal Services Agency and the New Zealand Law Society. Publicly provided services like the Public Defence Service should be used where there are sufficient case volumes to make them an efficient option. This would include places like Auckland Wellington and Christchurch and areas where there are particular problems with quality such as Palmerston North. My colleague Ian Lees-Galloway the very very competent member for Palmerston North has shown concern about the services in those areas and he is very pleased that there will be a lift in the quality of the services in Palmerston North. It was also recommended that there be a streamlined eligibility assessment model for low-cost criminal cases. 
All in all very common-sense recommendations were made. If we look at the background we see that criminal legal aid was established in 1912 and civil legal aid— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: The year the member was born! 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: That was a nonsensical thing to say and it did distract me for a moment. Civil legal aid came into effect in 1969. That interjection could have come in now actually—1969 would have been far more acceptable. Our current legal aid system dates from 1991 when the Legal Services Act was passed. 
Certainly Labour believes that the Legal Services Bill is very timely. It is a chance to overhaul the legal aid system. The reforms are positive particularly the emphasis on the public defender system and also on community law centres. I will spend a little time acknowledging the tremendous work done by community law centres in our communities. Often in our select committees we have submissions from community law centres on legal aid matters and many other issues. I must say that their focus is very much on access to justice and on getting the best deal for all—the importance of the many not just the few having access to justice. The constructive submissions that community law centres have brought to many select committees focus not so much on feathering their own nests or on their own personal remuneration but on providing the best justice system for all. 
I acknowledge the work of community law centres and particularly the fantastic work of the community law centre in Waitakere. My electorate office and many other west Auckland MPs’ offices often refer people to community law centres for advice. The feedback is that people receive very sound advice that enables them to go further with their concerns or in many cases they receive constructive advice to the effect that they should not go further and that prevents them from going down the line of very costly litigation. Community law centres should always be publicly funded. Labour is very very happy about the new emphasis being placed on community law centres playing a greater part within the system. 
Labour believes that the bill is necessary to restore taxpayer confidence in legal aid which is a vital part of our justice system. Labour is not saying that this bill in its current form is the perfect bill. That is certainly not the case but we believe that the bill should go to the Justice and Electoral Committee. We look forward to hearing the views of New Zealanders. I am a member of that select committee and during that process we will hear submissions not only from community law centres and the Law Society but also from people who have been part of the legal aid system and from lay people who are not necessarily lawyers but have an interest in seeing justice served. We will be very very pleased about that. 
Labour is also pleased that the Public Defence Service will be expanded. I acknowledge Phil Goff our leader who as Minister of Justice at that time launched the Public Defence Service. Without further ado I commend this bill to the House. Thank you very much.