Bonus: Federal budget & cuts to Legal Aid NSW

In this bonus episode of This Week in Family Law, we discuss the 2026 federal budget and the cuts to Legal Aid NSW, including what they mean for vulnerable Australians navigating the family law system.

From 1 July 2026, Legal Aid NSW will significantly tighten eligibility for family law representation, leaving many people with disabilities, older Australians, and those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds without legal help.

We also explore the impact of Independent Children’s Lawyers no longer appearing in final hearings in some instances, and whether technology and AI could play a role in helping lawyers support more people and bridge the access to justice gap.

About the podcast:
This Week in Family Law is the go-to podcast for busy Australian family lawyers looking to stay updated without the overwhelm. Whether you’re a family lawyer in Australia, a practitioner working towards CPD, or simply interested in family law, this podcast delivers clear, practical insights in a bite-sized format. Subscribe to stay up to date with the latest developments in Australian family law. New episodes drop every Monday.

Submit a question or provide feedback:
Email: familylawpodcast@leap.com.au
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@LEAPAu
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@leap.family.law1 
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/leapfamilylaw/

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:09

Welcome back to a bonus episode of This Week in Family Law. I'm Jenna Downey and my co-host today is Eleanor Buzewska. We wanted to share this bonus episode today to focus on an issue that deserves attention and more than just a brief passing comment. Today we're discussing the 2026 federal budget and the growing crisis facing legal aid and independent children's lawyers across Australia. Eleanor and I were both on the legal aid panel for some years. So this is something that we feel strongly about in terms of discussing the issue, and we have had conversations about it over the last week or so, and some of that we will share with you today. The Law Council of Australia, former family court judges, Legal Aid New South Wales, and family law practitioners have all raised serious concerns about the future of access to justice in family law matters. Following the federal budget announcement last week, and in response to ongoing funding pressures, Legal Aid New South Wales has now announced significant cuts to its family law services. From 1 July 2026, Legal Aid New South Wales says it will significantly tighten eligibility for family law representation. In practical terms, this means that people seeking assistance with property or parenting matters may now only qualify if they are victims of domestic violence or Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people. At the same time, independent children's lawyers or ICLs, as we refer to them, and for those listeners who are not family lawyers, it ICLs are essentially lawyers that are appointed to represent the interests of children in high-conflict family law disputes. ICLs may no longer appear in final hearings where both parents already have legal representation. That is, only in matters where one or both parties are self-represented will an ICL now be able to appear. Former family court judge Stephen Strickland described the cuts as outrageous and warned that reducing support for ICLs could slow court processes and create decisions being made without full information. Former Federal Circuit Court judge Stuart Lindsay talks about how ICLs are often the only independent voice for children caught in deeply complex parenting disputes. They help the court understand risk, family dynamics, allegations of abuse, and what outcomes may genuinely be in the child's best interests. And yet, despite performing some of the most emotionally difficult work in the legal system, many of these practitioners are already underpaid and overworked. Legal aid New South Wales are saying the cuts were due to the federal government not providing the funding needed to maintain their services in full. And then from a federal government perspective, they've arguably deemed the level of funding provided a budgeting necessity, which really brings this conversation into uncomfortable territory with many practitioners and those in the profession asking whether family law and legal aid should ever be the place governments choose to save money. Legal aid exists because not everyone can afford private legal representation. Without it, people simply cannot participate effectively in the justice system. That includes people with disabilities, older Australians, people experiencing mental health issues, and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. And it really sparks a conversation of access to justice. Because when people can't get legal help, cases can take longer, courts can become congested even more with matters, self-represented litigants increase, and children can remain in conflict for longer periods of time. It really risks creating a false economy, and that's my concern here. Yes, governments may reduce short-term expenditure, but the long-term social cost could be far greater. Delayed family law proceedings often mean prolonged trauma for children, increased pressures on courts, and more strain on already overwhelmed legal professionals. There's also a broader issue here about how we value justice infrastructure in Australia. The Law Council of Australia made the point that access to legal help should be treated the same way as health and education. It's an essential public service, it's not a luxury. And honestly, that's difficult to disagree with because if vulnerable people cannot realistically access the legal system, then the rule of law starts becoming less of a practical idea and more of a theoretical idea. And I wanted to get Eleanor's thoughts at this point on what do you think of these, of what's occurred and what the impact might be.

SPEAKER_00 5:29

Thank you, Jenna. I think the impact is going to be severe and it will continue certainly starting the 1st of July, as solicitors under a grant of legal aid are effectively going to need to turn around to their legally aided family law clients and um cease acting for them. And I imagine that would place a really uncomfortable and difficult burden, not only for the client, particularly depending on what um stage of proceedings they're in at that time when they receive that news, but also for the solicitor who's now developed and a relationship with that client and has advised them and guided that client through the proceedings. I imagine the immediate effect will be quite shocking and one that will probably result in the client attempting to negotiate with their solicitor, whether that is by trying to raise some funds privately, wherever possible or however possible, if that's even a possibility. Alternatively, possibly asking the solicitor to act pro bono. And as we know in practice, we develop a relationship with our clients. So to turn around to your client and possibly say that is not something a practice can afford to provide pro bono service or a significantly reduced cost service is going to mean that there's going to be a lot of tension in the profession and more burden on the lawyers in an already really difficult practice area.

SPEAKER_01 7:14

I think you're right in that you will have clients go to private practice solicitors looking to get some help, even though they they're not getting funded by legal aid and they can't afford to pay that private solicitor's costs. It really it's it's going to be really hard on a lot of practitioners to be able to work out what they do. And then as for the the vulnerable people who would otherwise have got legal aid funding, there if they don't have a private practice solicitor to help them, what's their other option?

SPEAKER_00 7:52

I imagine it some may go to a legal center for advice. Um I used to volunteer at a legal center for a number of years, and I I guess the funding issue was all ever present there as well. And the model of most legal centres is their funding is mostly expended on walk-in clients and one-off or perhaps on occasion advice, and it could be multiple times within the same matter, but it's discrete, it's time limited, and the client you know walks away from the practice having received a bit of advice and a step forward, but certainly not ongoing representation. In very limited situations, the legal centre can uh represent that client pro bono, but that was reserved for a very limited amount of cases.

SPEAKER_01 8:49

And for those clients who can't seek the help of a community legal centre, or if it is only ad hoc advice, then they're most likely going to have to self-represent throughout the proceedings.

SPEAKER_00 9:01

I imagine that that's probably going to be what most people need to do. And I can't imagine the level of delay and confusion that's going to cause not only the client affected, the other parties and the court. And as we know, resourcing is a problem on all levels. And I'm sure the court is going to be extremely burdened by what the effects of this is going is going to mean for practice.

SPEAKER_01 9:32

Yeah. And I will acknowledge that the federal government has pointed to significant funding commitments already made through the national access to justice partnership and other legal assistance schemes. But legal aid New South Wales, of course, says that the funding simply isn't keeping pace with demand, especially after family law reforms and increasing service pressures. And perhaps that's a key issue here that demand is continuing and has changed to be needed more so than ever, but the resourcing hasn't resolved with it. As family lawyers, we see firsthand how emotionally, financially, and psychologically draining these cases can be for families. And to think that they, that some families will will no longer have the assistance that they previously did is absolutely devastating. The idea that children's independent representation could become limited because of budget pressures is something that many practitioners, I'm sure, are very concerned about. And also the fact that groups of vulnerable people can no longer access legal aid funding at all is deeply confronting too.

SPEAKER_00 10:51

It certainly is. And I think when we think about the most vulnerable group, it's um, you know, specifically tied to family violence issues. We may consider the mother who is not able to meet private representation, but doesn't have a family violence um issue in the matter, which is now no longer eligible to receive legal aid. Um or um in cases where there is family violence, but the father is uh the applicant or the perpetrator is the applicant. And I'm sorry to make that generalization, but when I was in practice, I did receive under a legal aid grant uh grants to act for fathers who were perpetrators of family violence. And uh irrespective of those difficult circumstances, they did have merit to uh obtain a legal aid grant, and on that basis I was able to act for them. And I can imagine that mothers, fathers, perpetrators or victims uh essentially they're going to be um not able to receive that that help any longer.

SPEAKER_01 12:03

And this only applies in terms of the cuts to New South Wales, no other legal aid organizations in other states, as far as I'm aware, have announced similar cutbacks at this stage, but it is predicted that others may follow. So, yes, this is a this is an immediate issue for New South Wales at the moment, but the fact that this might carry across all other states in Australia, um, the issue is going to become more widespread in that instance.

SPEAKER_00 12:32

I agree.

SPEAKER_01 12:34

Um I think we'll also have to see what happens over the next 12 months too. It's obviously a very um recent issue that has come to light. And if it does become more widespread, and also even what's going to be the result that occurs in New South Wales, it is very much watch this space over the next six to twelve months to see the impact it really does have.

SPEAKER_00 13:02

I imagine there'll be significant commentary on this. There certainly has been in the last week, so we'll continue the conversation about this really important issue.

SPEAKER_01 13:12

As a final point, I wanted to share this, and this is something that I I've thought a lot about because we obviously work in legal tech, and a lot of our job is to help make processes more efficient for family lawyers and streamline workflow, particularly with the development, the more recent developments of AI and how useful it can be for practitioners to use in family law matters through a platform like LEAP. And I do genuinely think that AI has the potential to significantly streamline aspects of legal practice, particularly the administrative tasks, document generation as well, file management and those more procedural type of preparation for matters, which could ultimately reduce pressure on practitioners and improve efficiency across the profession. For legal aid practitioners, especially, where workloads are already incredibly high and resources are stretched thin, technology and AI could potentially become an important tool in helping lawyers manage increasing demand more effectively. But the difficult reality with these proposed changes is that many vulnerable people may not even get the opportunity to access assistance in the first place because of the tightened eligibility requirements and the inability for ICLs to appear at final hearings where both parties are represented. So I guess while technology can help to improve efficiency, efficiency alone isn't going to solve an access to justice issue, which this seems to be stepping into that realm of an issue at the moment. And if people are excluded before the system, even before they could even reach a lawyer, then again, this isn't going to resolve that type of issue. That said, and perhaps this is thinking very optimistically, as I as AI becomes more integrated into everyday family law practice, and as firms and legal aid providers become more efficient with their operations, maybe that does create an opportunity in the future for organizations like Legal Aid New South Wales to support more people with the same resources. Technology obviously cannot replace the human work that they do, but it can help free practitioners up for more to focus on those things and not those administrative type of tasks. So I thought I'd share that final point, hopefully leaving this on a bit more of a positive note to see, to think about the possibilities that technology could potentially help these type of issues in future.

SPEAKER_00 15:54

I think that's a very valid point because wherever there is a risk or a threat, there's always there's always an opportunity for how things can be solved. It's not, as you said, going to be a total replacement. Um but I I do agree with you that the reliance on AI or the importance of efficiency and technology is going to increase.

SPEAKER_01 16:22

Thank you, Eleanor. We've loved being in your ears for this bonus episode. If you would like to share your views on this topic, we'd be really interested to hear them. You can email us at familylawpodcast at leap.com.au or message us on YouTube, TikTok, or Instagram.