Conclusion
30. Following the Constitutional Affairs Committee's
report into the family justice system in the last Parliament,
we are pleased that there appears to be some movement on the issue
of transparency in the family courts, both from the Department
for Constitutional Affairs and the judiciary. We await the publication
of a consultation paper by the Department on this issue with interest.
31. In respect of the question of delay, it seems
plain that funding difficulties are holding back the judiciary
from improving the service that it can offer. We trust that the
Department will ensure that any short term difficulties in finance
do not impact upon the provision of vital services that the family
courts provide. In particular, we hope that the Department will
facilitate the "cascading down" of cases to the Family
Proceedings Courts, as suggested by the judiciary. To do this,
it needs to provide sufficient legal advisers, ensure that any
vacancies continue to be filled and remedy the lack of additional
District Judges (Magistrates Court) working full time on family
cases.
32. Finally, in relation to the issue of diverting
parents away from the courts, we believe that the Department needs
to think again about the question of compulsion. In terms of the
numbers participating, the Family Resolutions Pilot Project was
a failure. It seems plain that without an element of compulsion,
projects like the Family Resolutions Pilot Project will not succeed.
In particular, the Department should introduce a compulsory preliminary
meeting with a mediator. There is no reason why this is acceptable
for those seeking legal aid, but not for other couples.
|
