The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers
Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/50827
OP I N ION BY JIM MIDDLEMISS BACK PAGE Six billion reasons to automate I n January, Ontario Attorney General Chris Bentley was crowing about creating a fast- er and more affordable justice system. "A faster, more afford- able justice system is resulting from the improvements we are making. Our changes are saving Ontarians time and money," he said in touting his reforms. Really? Apparently Bentley hasn't visited his courts lately. Because if he had, he would see the dockets are jammed with self-represented litigants creating havoc for judges and litigants who do the right thing, which is hire qualified legal talent to represent them. Ontario has had a number of "civil justice reviews" culminating in reports from renowned judges on how to make courts better. The first dates back to Bob Rae in the 1990s. Before that, attorney general Ian Scott reformed the courts in the David Peterson government. However, it's not just Ontario. Civil justice reform and calls to do better are ringing out across the country. British Columbia has had its own task force reviewing the civil justice system and made a number of recommendations that are in the process of being implemented. Other provinces too are reviewing their court rules. Yet not much has changed in Ontario since the first Civil Justice Review in March 1995. For example, when it comes to accessing information about court fil- ings and the status of cases, the Ontario system makes the Tyrannosaurus rex seem downright modern. The system is fraught with paper; there is limited computer access to public or electronic records. If you want to pull a court file, good luck, at least in busy centres around Toronto. Expect a lengthy wait with virtu- ally no customer service. If you are lucky, you might be able to access one of the few computer terminals available to the public. That also assumes you can figure out the antiquated soft- ware. It's one step removed from the old DOS system that fired up the first person- al computers in the 1980s. Simply put, our court system is a closed system built by bureaucrats for lawyers and judges. They control information and access to it. The public is an afterthought. Contrast that to the United States' PACER system: public access to court records, which allows effi- cient Internet access to extensive case and docket information from federal appellate, district, and bankruptcy courts. There is no counterpart here in Canada. Part of the problem, as always in this country, is juggling federal and provincial responsibilities. The provinces are respon- sible for administering laws. So the justice system is a mishmash when it comes to court service levels, policies, and proce- dures. It differs courthouse to courthouse, never mind city to city or region to region. How does that serve the public? In the 1990s, the Ontario government under Mike Harris wanted to automate the court system with the introduction of the Integrated Justice Project. The idea was to introduce technology to make the courts more efficient and wring out savings that would be used to pay for the modernization. It died a slow death amid feuding over turf among judges, bureau- crats, and unions. Almost 20 years later and little has changed, at least in Ontario. It shouldn't be that way. A review of the 2009-10 public accounts for Canada's 11 main governments shows that minis- tries of justice across the country spend a total of $5.9 billion annually to run programs in their departments, including court and victims' services. Justice spend- ing is between one and four per cent of total government spending, depending on jurisdiction. It ranges from a low in Prince Edward Island of $39 million to the federal government high of $1.5 bil- lion, with Ontario close behind at $1.4 bil- lion. Meanwhile, Canada's second most- populous province, Quebec, spends less than half of that or about $686.5 million. In fact, in the mid 1990s, Ontario's justice budget was half of what it is now, so the McGuinty government has managed to double spending, yet problems remain. The challenges facing the justice sys- tem in Canada are not spending prob- lems. We're good at spending. What we're not good at is productivity and get- ting a bang for our tax bucks. Maybe it's time to stop holding "civil justice reviews" overseen by judges and min- istry bureaucrats. They have had their shot at fixing the problem and failed. Let's turn it over to the innovative technology and management consult- ing companies that Canada is proudly growing and let's ask them how we can build a better justice system for our six billion in tax dollars. We might be sur- prised at their answers. Jim Middlemiss (jmiddlemiss@webnewsman- agement.com) is a Toronto lawyer and writer. The McKellar Structured Settlement™ 46 M A RCH 2011 www. CANADIAN Lawyermag.com Untitled-2 1 12/8/10 3:45:27 PM scott PAge