Dr WOODRUFF – Attorney-General, earlier this year the House of Assembly passed the Justice and Related Legislation (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill. Coroner Cooper warned, and the Greens raised this as an issue in the second reading, that the enactment of that bill would result in a doubling of coronial investigations, but you disputed his assessment. Clearly, however, you wouldn’t disagree, I’d expect, that it must result in some increased workload. Are you able to listen to my question? In your second reading reply, you said:
We are working with the court on assessing charges to inquest numbers and we will deal appropriately with any necessary increase in resources as required.
Despite those assurances, there’s no specific allocation to the Coroners Court in the Budget. Was there a budget request for more funding from the Coroners Court?
Mr BARNETT – Thanks very much for the question and your interest in this matter. To my understanding, that bill still hasn’t passed the Legislative Council as yet, that’s my advice.
Dr WOODRUFF – That’s why I mentioned the House of Assembly.
Mr BARNETT – Yes, thank you very much for noting that. The decision that’s yet to be made about when the legislation will commence is subject to the upper House considering it and passing that. This has been based on advice and feedback from the department. That’s why what I said in the second reading debate and in the summing up at the time was based on that advice.
Dr WOODRUFF – Attorney-General, just a simple answer to the question: did you receive a request for additional budget from the coroner’s office?
Mr BARNETT – You’ve asked quite a long question and I was responding to that question.
Dr WOODRUFF – I didn’t actually. I made a statement and there was one question. It was about the Budget and the Budget we’ve got, which is what we’re here to talk about. Did the coroner’s office make a request for more money?
Mr BARNETT – We’re still working through the department with the coroner’s office. They’ve obviously, through the department, had ongoing engagement with the Magistrates Court and they have ongoing engagement with the coroner’s office and the Chief Coroner. I’ve recently, within the last two months, met with the Chief Coroner as well and that was not a specific request raised with me at the time. In terms of those important matters, that’s something that the department works through with the Magistrates Court and the Coroner’s Office. My expectation is that those discussions will be had in due course.
Dr WOODRUFF – Can you please answer my question? In the preparation of this Budget, did the Coroner’s Court make any request for additional funding?
Mr BARNETT – I’d have to take advice from the acting secretary.
Ms BOURNE – There was a general budget ask for the Magistrates Court in relation to general operating expenses and budget risks, including coronial but not specifically related to this proposed change in the legislation. I note that discussions have been ongoing between the department and the Magistrates Court and the Coronial Division. I note the concerns expressed by the Coronial Division around the impact of these amendments. I note that the particular part of the act commences on proclamation, whereas the remainder of the act commences on Royal Assent. We are continuing to work with the court to assess the impact of the changes so that we can provide advice to government about any necessary increase in resources required. It’s intended, or the amendment is designed to catch those rarer cases that may not currently go to inquest, or where criminal charges do not result in the public interest matters being addressed.
Dr WOODRUFF – I read in your answer that there was a request made, and a request was not given in the Budget, and the department is considering further funding. But a request was made and it was not funded. Can you confirm that there was a strategic review from the Coroners Court that was passed a year ago and that would have identified the issues of under‑resourcing?
Mr BARNETT – First of all, we don’t concur with your remarks. The acting secretary has outlined the process in terms of the Magistrates Court requesting funding support –
Dr WOODRUFF – Sorry to interrupt, can I just get clarity? I asked not about the Magistrates Court but the Coroners Court. The acting secretary did say, I understand, that there had been conversations from the Coroners Court. There was a request for extra money. I think we’ve got that. Now I’m talking about –
Mr BARNETT – You can’t have words put into the mouths of either the Attorney‑General or the acting secretary. I’d like the opportunity for the acting secretary to clarify the record so that the member in the committee can be very aware of the advice that the acting secretary has provided.
CHAIR – For clarity, could we get what’s been said?
Dr WOODRUFF – A simple yes or no.
Ms BOURENE – There was no specific request from the coronial division of the Magistrates Court for additional funding with respect to these legislative changes. The department, in consultation on behalf of the court, did put forward through the normal budget process budget risks related to the operations of the Magistrates Court general. I note that some additional funding has been provided to support the ongoing operations of the court as a whole. No specific request in relation to this specific legislative amendment.
Dr WOODRUFF – Okay, thank you. Following up on the strategic plan 12 months ago that the Coroners Court provided to the government, they made it clear they needed a new location with new courtrooms so that they could hear all the matters that are referred to them. You did not fund that in the budget. Why not?
Mr BARNETT – Thank you for the question. I appreciate the question. I’m not quite 12 months into the role as the Attorney‑General. That will be in early October. I’m not aware of that specific plan that you make reference to. I know the acting secretary is aware of that, if I could refer to the acting secretary. Before I do so, I would like to say that in my meetings with the Chief Coroner, which were very cooperative and collaborative and positive, there was clearly an outlining of the challenges, opportunities, and workload of the Chief Coroner.
Dr WOODRUFF – Chair, I point you to the time. I would really appreciate the answer. I’ll ask it directly to the acting secretary, which I’m allowed to do if the minister can’t answer it. Can he please hand it over to her?
CHAIR – One last question and then we’ll have to move on. I can’t instruct the minister on how to how to answer questions or what to say. It’s going to be a lot more if we don’t have interjections and it’ll go a lot quicker if we don’t have interjections.
Dr WOODRUFF – Thank you, Chair. In past members of the committee have asked the Chair to move the minister on if the minister won’t answer the question or won’t pass it to the person at the table who can answer the question.
Ms WHITE – When will you respond to that business case that was put for the strategic plan?
Mr BARNETT – Can you hear from the acting secretary?
Dr WOODRUFF – That would be great. Stop talking.
Mr BARNETT – We’re trying to help you.
Ms BOURNE – Attorney-General, through you. There is a coronial services plan that the Coronial Division prepared. In my substantive role I had a number of discussions with the administrator and the Chief Coroner in terms of the long-term evaluation and plan that they had put together around the strategic direction of the Court, including its future operation.
Those discussions are ongoing and noting that at the time that the plan was provided to the agency, we were just shy of entering this current Budget or the budget process for the 2024‑25 year. Certainly, something the department will continue to talk to government about, noting the work that’s gone into the plan, recognising the Coronial Division’s growth in workload and the other workload growths across the court so there is a coronial plan that has been prepared by that division which the agency is preparing advice for the Attorney-General on.
Dr WOODRUFF – When would a timeline for that decision be made do you think for the next budget process? Will that be happening?
CHAIR – The last question will go to Ms Johnston.
Ms BOURNE – Without pre-empting the further work that the agency will soon commence in earnest for the next budget process, this is an area of focus that I would like to include noting the range of priorities across the agency that we would also no doubt be seeking to put forward, but it’s something that I’ve given an undertaking to the Court to put into the mix for the next budget process.
Mr BARNETT – I want to confirm what the acting secretary has said. It’s at the forefront of my mind, the heavy workload for the Coronial Division of the Magistrates Court. I will absolutely be working with the Chief Coroner and the Magistrates Court and getting their feedback, in liaison with the Department of Justice. It’s very much on my mind and I appreciate the work that they do.
