Part 2-Registrar's report

This year has been an interesting period of both consolidation and change for the Tribunals.

The Tribunals were pleased that the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Senator Chris Evans, was able to deliver in February this year - so soon after his appointment - a keynote address to Members at their National Conference in Melbourne. The Minister's visit in May to the Tribunals' Principal Registry and NSW Registry, where he met Board members and legal, country research and registry staff, was also very warmly received. An effective working relationship with the Minister's office was established early in 2008.

The operational challenges facing the Tribunals continued this year with strong efforts being made by senior management, Members and staff to address them. From his appointment in September last year as Principal Member, Mr Denis O'Brien initiated a number of important changes affecting corporate governance, case allocation policy, caseload management and other key areas of Tribunal operations.

An initial step was a review of the membership, business and responsibilities of the Joint Management Board, the Senior Management Group and the Member Professional Development Committee. The review has delivered a more strategic and effective level of governance and an increased focus on Member professional development. Mrs Mary Urquhart, the RRT's Deputy Principal Member and acting MRT Senior Member, who is based in Melbourne, was allocated national responsibility for the professional development of MRT and RRT Members.

Following the completion of the co-location and administrative amalgamation of the Tribunals in 2005, cases of both Tribunals were evenly allocated to all Members who, being cross-appointed, were expected to develop proficiency on both Tribunals' cases. However, case law and legislative developments and a dynamic caseload have made decision making on each Tribunal progressively more complex and time consuming.

To accommodate these factors, progressive changes during the year to the caseload and constitution policy have ensured that Members with the requisite experience, proficiency and interest in particular visa classes have been allocated such cases. More selective case allocation, along with other strategies, such as the 'batching' of like MRT cases to Members and the transfer of 'older' Victorian MRT cases to New South Wales Members have resulted in more efficient and earlier resolution of these cases.

I believe these strategies have generated efficiencies, an improved corporate culture, better communications between Members, staff and senior management and better relationships with applicants and community practitioners.

Strong efforts were also made during the year to increase the level of compliance with the requirement for RRT reviews to be conducted in 90 days. Following a close review by Board members and the Senior Management Group of all aspects of the conduct of RRT reviews, including a performance comparison of the NSW and VIC registries, the Principal Member has recently issued a policy guideline to Members and staff on ways reviews can be better managed to reduce the time taken to complete cases.

Much attention has been paid during the year to revising how the Tribunals can deal more efficiently and sensitively with reviews, particularly those concerning applicants in detention. Improved file management, enhanced internal monitoring and reporting and Principal Member Directions have led to greater priority and effort in dealing with such matters.

The working relationship and communications between the Department's State Offices, the Villawood and Maribynong Detention Centres and the Tribunals' NSW and VIC Registries were much improved during the year, along with a better understanding by Members and registry staff of applicants' circumstances and needs when they attend hearings.

A very pleasing development has been the improved flow of business intelligence to the Joint Management Board enabling far more targeted and effective allocation of cases to Members than has been previously possible. The Case Management Section is to be commended for their achievements in this area. Credit must also be given to CaseMate - the Tribunals' case management system and its managers and developers.

Effective case management is important to meeting Government and community expectations of the Tribunals. CaseMate has proved to be an outstanding system for effective case management by Members and staff and for case allocation purposes. CaseMate provides for the processing and management of cases by both Members and staff.

Examples of some of its features are: individual Member case progress reports and Member case finalisation and performance reports can be generated as well as all registry client letters and forms. It electronically stores case documents and is heavily used for statistical reporting purposes. It also enables the storage of digital audio recordings of hearings, which is a major efficiency as the record of hearings can be replayed by Members on their office personal computers.

During the year, a review of CaseMate was conducted by the CaseMate Review Committee comprising Members and staff. The Committee conducted a survey of Members and staff and conducted a number of focus sessions. In a very thorough and thoughtful report, the Committee made recommendations to the Joint Management Board in relation to improvements and enhancements which could be made to CaseMate, and in relation to training, procedures and support arrangements.

While the Board had not, at year's end, settled a position on the review, future CaseMate developments that have been proposed include the on-line lodgement and filing of documents through a secure web site, extending the current document storage and management capability to a full archival record, and on-line access to case information.

The Tribunals' relationship with the Department remained operationally very effective. Cooperation continued on a number of fronts to achieve greater efficiencies between the agencies. For example, a statutory obligation exists for the Department to provide the Tribunals with the documentation required for a review. The Tribunals and the Department are reviewing arrangements in relation to the timely identification, checking and transfer of documents to the Tribunals, including documents held electronically.

In this regard, an important issue that will be discussed further with the Department during financial year 2008-09 is the Tribunals' proposal that applicants should receive a copy of the relevant Departmental decision making papers at the same time as the Department provides these papers to the Tribunals. The Tribunals consider that the provision to all applicants of early access to all relevant papers would speed up the review processes and put applicants in a better position to understand and respond to issues. It would provide applicants with what is the norm for applicants before other tribunals and reduce delays as many applicants make FOI requests to the Department for their files during Tribunal reviews.

The decisions made by the Tribunals, and particularly those made by the RRT, are subject to a high level of scrutiny by the courts. More than 45% of the decisions made by the RRT in 2007-08 were appealed. This is a much higher appeal rate than for any other similar Australian Government agency. However, the number of cases overturned by the Courts is low compared to the overall number of cases decided. Only 4.8% of 38,002 decisions made by the Tribunals over the last 4 years have been set aside by the Courts.

As far as the Tribunals' financial performance is concerned, positive discussions were held with the Department of Finance as part of a review of the Tribunals' funding arrangements, which were last reviewed in 2004. Since then, changes in case law and legislation have progressively increased the complexity of reviews. This has had the effect of reducing the number of cases that a Member can decide over the course of a year.

As the Tribunals' funding is currently linked to an estimate of the number of decisions made each year, this reduction in the number of cases finalised, along with efficiency measures applied across agency budgets, contributed to the Tribunals having an operating loss. The Tribunals have introduced a number of measures seeking to reduce expenditure, consistent with adjustments to funding levels and are hopeful of achieving a funding agreement that reflects the true costs of delivering reviews that are fair, just, economical, informal and quick.

The Tribunals' staff certified agreement is due to expire in November 2008. Negotiations with the CPSU and APESMA, representing staff, were in progress at the end of the financial year. The Tribunals are seeking a variation and extension of the agreement.

In closing, I would like to express my thanks and appreciation to Members and staff of the Tribunals for working together so cooperatively in a demanding, fast moving and complex operational environment. Their hard work, commitment and sensitivity to client needs and expectations served to promote the professional reputation of the Tribunals.

John Lynch
Registrar