Dalziel: Coalition of Community Law Centres
new-zealand-labour-party
Tue Mar 10 2009 13:00:00 GMT+1300 (New Zealand Daylight Time)
Dalziel: Coalition of Community Law Centres
Tuesday, 10 March 2009, 4:11 pm
Speech: New Zealand Labour Party
Hon Lianne Dalziel
Spokesperson on Justice
Spokesperson on Commerce
Labour MP for Christchurch East
SPEECH
10 March 2009 Speech Notes
Coalition of Community Law Centres – Annual Hui
Brentwood Hotel, Kilbirnie
Wellington
11.00am
I am pleased to be able to address you today as the Opposition spokesperson on Justice, although I wish the circumstances that this address relates to were a lot more favourable than they are. I have been given a short period of time to summarise my views on the appropriate response to the serious crisis that you all face as a result of the reduced funding available in the next financial year. So I am going to cut to the chase. You have all read the letter I have written to the Minister and you will know that I believe that there must be two levels of response.
One is immediate, addressing the shortfall in funding for the 2009/10 year, which at the very least maintains last year’s level of funding, preferably including a cost of living adjustment. The second response is to commence the Review of Services & Funding Arrangements of Community Law Centres that was deferred in 2006. There are those who believe, (I suspect assisted with the benefit of hindsight), that it shouldn’t have been deferred at the time and, although I personally believe that these kinds of reviews are best conducted during the good times, I don’t think anyone could have accurately predicted back in 2006 what has occurred today with major reductions in house prices, interest rates and house sales, all occurring at once.
Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
It is also worth remembering that when the decision was made to defer the review, the Lawyers & Conveyancers Act had just been passed and was still to be implemented and there was a change in the proportion of the interest allocated to the banks and the Special Fund coming into effect. Although that was a legitimate consideration back then, it is no longer such and I believe that is why it is imperative that this review take place. But it shouldn’t be rushed and it shouldn’t focus on the short term issues. The review should take the time it needs to come up with a sustainable funding path for the existing community law centres and for the future developments that have been deferred as a result of this funding crisis.
Some people think the concerns are just about reducing existing services, but they are not. The Legal Services Agency is aware that there are gaps in provision and this year was going to see a major one of those gaps filled. I am talking about Northland where the need for community law support is significant.
Community Law Centres are designed to meet the needs of their particular community – so it isn’t a one-size-fits-all. It is vital that the long-term funding pathway reflects this community diversity. And that means that alternative finding mechanisms and service provision models, for example utilising legal aid, will not be universal solutions, but rather part of an overall mix.
So that’s my attitude to the funding issue – two steps are required – immediate (which may include a variety of options plus a budget bid) and long term which includes an in-depth review of services and funding. As you know, I have written to the Minister setting out the opposition’s willingness to work collaboratively on these issues.
The second issue that is relevant to today’s discussion is whether the LSA is the right body to be contracting with the community law centres. The answer to this would depend to a large extent on the review of services & funding. There is an argument for LSA taking the lead role, given its arms-length from government. But if the solution lies with a separate line item in the Justice Ministry’s budget, then it makes sense to cut out the middle-man. The risk in this though is the potential loss of community relevance, as there is a tendency for Ministries to adopt a standardised approach and there is always the risk of fearing ‘biting the hand that feeds you’. I know how much you value your autonomy and I agree that it is vital to maintain it. Any change in this regard would have to guarantee your ability to provide advocacy on issues even when that opposed government policy. If the solution lies in different funding mechanisms that includes for example a pro bono commitment from firms doing government work, as in Victoria, then a direct relationship with the NZ Law Society will be necessary. NZLS President, John Marshall’s point that responsibility for access to justice lies with lawyers as well as with the government is well made, but money for the current Special Fund does not come from lawyers but from their clients. I really believe this is an open question that serious requires consideration as part of the review because the answer is not clear-cut.
I have been a little concerned about the role of the Public Advisory Committee given that it is unclear what role they played in the decisions that led to the LSA review of funding options in light of the current crisis. Their advice certainly wasn’t recorded in any of the paperwork I have seen. It may well be that District Legal Services Committees were better at identifying local needs based on local provision, which reinforces my view that there cannot be a ‘one-size-fits-all’. And that means that the method of ensuring community input into the funding regime needs to be included in the review.
The last of the issues I want to comment on is the phrasing of the LSA obligation to fund, provide and support community legal services. These services according to the Legal Services Act are funded from either the Special Fund or ‘any other money held by the Agency specifically for the support of community law centres”. This is money “held by…”; not “raised by…”. So the concern for me is that the LSA has no obligation other then to administer what it holds or in other words what it has received. There is no fundraising obligation under the current law and this too needs to be considered in the context of the wider review.
The final point I want to make is this. I am aware that some people will have an expectation that the current government would not support community law centres as a matter of ideology. I think that is true. However it is my view that the Minister of Justice, the Hon Simon Power, is sincere in his stated commitment to access to justice for all and it is also my view that the government will want to be seen to be supporting this commitment, which is why I think his budget bid will be successful. I too have met with the Minister and I share the optimism expressed by John Marshall in this regard.
Having experience as a Minister myself, the Minister may not be able to give you the level of assurance you are looking for right now, because Budget secrecy will surround the result of his bid. However he should be able to give some indication about prospects, as well as real assurances about the direction of the future debate which must focus on a long term sustainable funding path for this vital sector of our community.
My colleague, Jacinda Adern, one of Labour’s new List MPs, has already drafted a private members bill that reallocates the percentages on the interest on trust accounts for CLCs and banks to 80% and 20% respectively. This is to ensure that there is a vehicle for the statutory changes that may still be a part of the matrix that will resolve this issue. Given the lack of transparency that exists with the banks, who intimate that their fees would be higher than their share of the interest they retain, then this may not be the long-term solution the sector needs. It is time to challenge the banks to be more transparent and if there was ever a time for them to be so, it is now. I am not saying their position is one of intransigence, because the truth is circumstances change. It wasn’t that long ago that current accounts did not attract any interest – that was the preserve of savings accounts. So some free and frank discussion is required and a Bill focused solely on this may assist in getting better disclosure from the banks. The timing of the introduction of the Bill to the ballot will depend somewhat on the nature of the Minister’s response to the call for intervention, but I believe it is worth pursuing so that the banks can be questioned on this issue.
In my letter to the Minister exactly one month ago, I made the point that this was a time when the community law centres were needed more than ever. I have made two referrals from my busy electorate office on Saturday alone. As New Zealand feels the impact of the worst economic crisis to hit the global financial markets, the need for your services grows.
I concluded that letter by offering to work with the government on the range of options that would produce a workable solution, first, to see community law centres through this difficult time and, second, to allow for a more substantial review to be undertaken without the pressure of the crisis.
This may not be a particularly ‘political’ response, but the future of this sector is much more important than political point-scoring and as I have said the result of the Budget bid will be an important measure of the Minister’s stated commitment to the sector. His agreement to a wider review will be the measure of his commitment to getting a sustainable funding model in place so that the future of the sector is assured. It is my judgement that he will agree to both processes and for the sector’s sake I hope I am right.
So on that note, thank you once more for inviting me to participate in this discussion and I look forward to responding to the questions you may wish to raise.
ENDS
Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
a.supporter:hover {background:#EC4438!important;} @media screen and (max-width: 480px) { #byline-block div.byline-block {padding-right:16px;}}
Using Scoop for work?
Scoop is free for personal use, but you’ll need a licence for work use. This is part of our Ethical Paywall and how we fund Scoop. Join today with plans starting from less than $3 per week, plus gain access to exclusive Pro features.
Join Pro Individual Find out more
Find more from New Zealand Labour Party on InfoPages.