LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSION (CHARGES ON LAND) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 15 September 2011.)

The Hon. M. PARNELL (17:25): The Greens support the second reading of this bill, which is a fairly simple bill to clarify that a charge on land in favour of the Legal Services Commission does in fact operate as intended, notwithstanding that the property charged may be sold by a third party.

The Legal Services Commission operates under fairly tight financial arrangements and, whether we like it or not, is obliged to seek recovery of its legal costs in as many cases as possible. The Legal Services Commission, on its website, includes an information sheet entitled 'Statutory Charge', which it gives to all legally-aided persons where there is an intention to get them to sign a consent to a statutory charge form.

This information sheet sets out fairly simply, under the heading 'Legal Aid is not Free', that if you as a legally-aided person or a financially-associated person own or are buying real estate and if there is equity in that real estate and the legal fees being spent on your behalf are likely to be more than $2,000, the legal aid is less a gift than a loan. The way the repayment of that loan is secured is via a charge on property. It is not a new regime and all this bill seeks to do is to clarify that it has the effect that I assume most people believe it always has had. We can see no reason, in principle, why this simple legislation should not be approved.

There is some question around the retrospective operation of this bill and, generally speaking, the Greens do not support retrospective legislation unless there is a good reason to do so and unless there is no particular harm or injustice done by it. We will reserve our position on the amendment: first of all, to see whether it is moved; and, secondly, what our position will be. We look forward to that debate. However, for present purposes we think this is a sensible, remedial bill that is deserving of support at the second reading.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. J.M. Gazzola.