Community Justice Centres Amendment Bill 2007

The Hon. PENNY SHARPE (Parliamentary Secretary) [9.45 p.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions to the debate on the Community Justice Centres Amendment Bill 2007. Community justice centres have offered dispute resolution services to people in New South Wales for more than 20 years. The amendments proposed in the bill will improve the operation of the Act and allow community justice centres to continue helping people to resolve their differences effectively. They will also allow community justice centres to pursue a broader mandate of promoting and developing out-of-court dispute resolution in New South Wales.

I will address some of the issues that were raised during the debate. Ms Lee Rhiannon expressed concern that the Government is not implementing all the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission in its report on community justice centres. This is because many of the commission's recommendations related to the now-defunct Community Justice Centres Council. In fact, it should be noted that in this bill the Government proposes to formally abolish the council. This is because the priority for community justice centres is to obtain regular feedback from clients so that they can improve service delivery and meet clients' needs. A high-level council is not an effective way of obtaining this type of feedback.

In 2001 the Community Justice Centres Council proposed its own dissolution and recommended the establishment of a community committee to advise the director. Since then community justice centres have established two reference groups-the Professional Reference Group and the Training Group-which provide advice on practical matters relating to the operation of the centres. Community justice centres are also preparing to establish a stakeholder consultative committee in line with the recommendation made by the council in 2001. This committee will provide regular advice and feedback to community justice centres on alternative dispute resolution issues. In this context the continued existence of the council is considered to be unnecessary.

Ms Lee Rhiannon also questioned why it has taken some time to implement the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission. This is mainly because much time and care was taken to consult a number of stakeholders. The stakeholders who had input into the bill include the Chief Magistrate, Aboriginal Justice Advisory Council, Law Society of New South Wales, Legal Aid Commission, Women's Legal Service, Department of Aboriginal Affairs, Department of Local Government, Department of Housing, Department of Community Services, Director of Public Prosecutions, New South Wales Police Force, Combined Community Legal Centres Group (NSW), and the Community Justice Centres Professional Reference Group.

As to the concerns expressed about mediators being public sector employees, I am advised that the Law Reform Commission report considered that mediators should continue to be ministerial appointees as this method of appointment generally gives mediation a degree of independence from the Government. Submissions to the commission by stakeholders participating in the review supported the continuation of this method of employment on the grounds that it ensured the independence of mediators. However, the independence of mediators in a dispute is not premised on their status as ministerial appointees. A mediator is, by definition, a neutral and impartial person whose role is to help people understand each other's point of view and work together to reach agreement. None of the community justice centres' counterparts in other Australian jurisdictions use ministerial appointment as the method of employing mediators. The independence of mediators derives not from their employment status but from the nature of their profession.

At present community justice centres mediators are formally accredited by the Attorney General and their legal status is that of an employee. The bill proposes to set out clearly and explicitly the status of a mediator as an employee. This is vital to ensuring certainty of the terms under which mediators work and clarity in their relationship with the department. In answer to Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile, I confirm that mediators will be appointed by the Director General of the Attorney General's Department. I thank members for their contributions to the debate and commend the bill to the House.