Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Bill 2020
Ms WEBB (Nelson) – Mr President, I appreciate the contributions already made. I will add mine to follow on from the member for Hobart.
I will be supporting this bill, which will set the groundwork for the Tasmanian civil and administrative tribunal establishing a shared location, as well as shared objectives – an agreed structure for the nine boards and tribunals coming together under the one roof.
As we have heard, the bill is the first legislative step in establishing TasCAT. It has taken a dedicated effort over many years to come to fruition. I congratulate the Government and the staff from the Department of Justice, both past and present, for their work on this bill. Other jurisdictions have successfully amalgamated their tribunals in such a way, and it is appropriate and timely for Tasmania to follow suit. We are fortunate to be able to draw on and learn from the experience and lessons of other states.
The creation of TasCAT may lead to efficiencies and eventually cost savings through the resource- and service-sharing aspects of the amalgamation. Cost savings – often the aim at the beginning – do not necessarily eventuate over the longer term. However, we can remain optimistic on that front. There will be greater administrative support for the tribunals with this model. There will be a benefit in staff being able to move across jurisdictions in line with workload ebbs and flows. Through this model, staff may also have access to greater career development opportunities and benefit from sharing skills and expertise with a larger cohort.
There may also be scope for specialised corporate services such as HR and IT freeing up senior managers to exercise their primary roles. I see this as potentially a very fruitful model to take us forward. Being able to share technology, including data collection and reporting, will enable TasCAT to invest in more tailored and compatible technological solutions that will improve overall service delivery.
It is particularly beneficial for smaller tribunals that perhaps previously did not have the scale or resources to justify the type of investment that might be needed in this sort of technological way forward. My expectation would be the Government would commit to the idea any savings that may be eventually made could be reinvested into TasCAT, so it can continue to improve the services it provides and the ways it provides those services to the community.
I understand the new premises incorporate a number of easy access features and I am particularly happy the TasCAT building in Barrack Street has been designed with the specific needs of clients in mind. Old buildings with steps and tight doorways can be an obstacle for some people in accessing government services as many of us know only too well. I am pleased to hear the TasCAT building has been fitted out for easy access by all clients, be they people with a disability, the elderly, people pushing a pram or any other sorts of challenges people may face around accessibility. A disability access bathroom and toilet area are a welcome addition and one we can not necessarily take for granted in all circumstances. Modern technologies, including things such as hearing loops, and public interface facilities along with upgraded audiovisual and recording facilities are also very welcome additions.
There will be a mix of large hearing rooms, mediation rooms and smaller one-on-one rooms in the office, which is an appropriate way to cater for needs within the activities of the various tribunals. These are important details to accommodate different circumstances in this way, because discrimination and indirect discrimination can come in many forms – not being able to access a building, being unable to hear or see what is happening or not having access to a quiet, low sensory space for meetings are all potentially forms of indirect or avoidable discrimination.
Having nine tribunals in the same building, sharing staff knowledge and working with online technology should make it easier for clients to access the range of services they need and reduce the duplication of effort by each tribunal involved. I think that holding the clients and their experience at the centre of that is quite important, and it looks to me that this could deliver a better outcome.
I acknowledge the benefits of information-sharing in many circumstances,. However, like the member for Hobart, I also have noted a concern on this front. I also would like assurances from the Government adequate protections will be in place to protect client privacy and avoid any preconceived bias. I think that ties in –
Mr Valentine – That is exactly what I was talking about. You just describe it better than I do.
Ms WEBB – We all know of instances where potentially a constituent gets labelled difficult or vexatious by a particular department; this label can then follow them, and that is perhaps an unfair outcome. It certainly can impede their access to justice if that label then changes the way they are treated.
This is something I put to the Government to consider carefully and to guard against, particularly given the vulnerability of many of the people who require the services of these tribunals.
I trust that every jurisdiction within TasCAT will treat each person and issue on their own merits and will have firm practices in place to actively support that to happen.
It is also important to highlight the need for each tribunal to continue to include specialist members and undertake specialised actions as currently required under relevant legislation. I understand that the legislative requirements of the individual tribunals will remain because it is very clear that amalgamation does not necessarily have to mean homogenisation or generalisation, as the member for Hobart has already spoken about. I agree there are risks involved in that and they need not just to be noted, but also be actively guarded against or worked to overcome at this early stage
I am pleased to see the people and service focus in clause 10 of this bill, which deals with the main objectives of the tribunal. Clause 10 states that TasCAT is to –
..promote the best principles of public administration, including –
(i) independence in decision-making; and
(ii) natural justice and procedural fairness; and
(iii) high-quality and consistent decision-making; and
(iv) transparency and accountability in the performance and exercise of statutory functions, powers and duties …
It also sets out easy access objectives of the tribunal.
Clause 10(1)(b) states that tribunals are –
to be accessible by being easy to find and easy to access, and to be responsive to parties, especially people with greater needs for assistance than others.
It goes on then to specify –
that applications, referrals and appeals should be processed and resolved quickly, justly, and at the lowest appropriate cost using the most appropriate resolution procedures available.
It stipulates that straightforward language and procedures are to be used and that tribunals are to act flexibly, informally and generally rather than technically wherever possible.
Finally, it requires that the tribunal consult with agencies, organisations and other bodies when dealing with matters as appropriate.
I think all these things are strong and worthy goals and good stated objectives to have there. They certainly put people – and the vulnerable people who will be often involved – at the centre of consideration, and I applaud that.
These objectives should certainly be quite actively embedded in every aspect of the tribunal’s operations, from the initial contact in person, online or by the phone and the construction of tools such as forms, web services and documents through to staff and strategic planning and, most importantly, client management processes.
I am interested to know from the Government: How will those objectives, which are very admirable, be monitored and measured by TasCAT? How will TasCAT implement, monitor and review its performance against those objectives? Is there, or will there be, a formal mechanism for this to occur? If so what would it include? How will we know? How will we be able to say to ourselves, ‘Yes, TasCAT is meeting those objectives and we can be reassured and confident that clients are indeed getting the best possible service, access and outcomes they deserve’?
In particular, I would like to see the public given the opportunity to provide feedback, both the public that has used the services, and others, who, for whatever reason, have been perhaps excluded or not able to access the tribunal system. Such feedback would ensure services really understand the extent to which, and how successfully, they are meeting the important standards that are articulated and, through that, the needs of the clients who come to be involved. Then we, as a community, can be assured the tribunal is serving the broader community well.
The bill establishes TasCAT. It is a necessary and progressive first step towards the formal transfer of powers and staff to the new body. The amalgamation of tribunals promises many benefits potentially to the community, to the tribunal officers themselves and the staff. As the Australian Lawyers Alliance stated in its submission to this process of amalgamating tribunals, it considers it is –
…an important measure to achieve greater access to justice for disadvantaged people facing a range of civil issues including discrimination, dust disease, guardianship and administration issues, mental health and residential tenancy disputes.
I pick up on that access to justice in particular for disadvantaged people in our community.
This solid and people-focused bill will form a strong base for the next important legislative stages that will follow to expand TasCAT’s jurisdiction. I support the bill.
