1. It is a pleasure to be here this morning at Inner Temple, my own Inn, to welcome you to this event to reflect on and celebrate the work of the Family Drug and Alcohol Court. I am grateful to the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, and to Lord Justice Peter Jackson, lead FDAC judge, for inviting me.

2. I welcome the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, Lord Frederick Ponsonby. I understand that the Minister for Children and Families, Janet Daby MP, is unable to be with us today due to a prior commitment but that she has kindly provided a recorded message which we will hear later. That both an MoJ minister and a DfE minister have taken the time to signal their support is a welcome demonstration of the Government's interest in FDAC.

3. This room is filled with judges who sit in FDAC and others who are hoping that an FDAC will open in their area. You are all family law specialists with a deep commitment to delivering justice in the best possible way. I never practiced family law, but I have sat on family appeals and know how acutely difficult these cases can be for families and for judges. In the year since I became Lady Chief Justice, I have also been struck by the sheer workload of the Family Court, which entail more judge sitting days than either the criminal or the civil courts. That context is important as we discuss FDAC, because it shows how widespread its benefits might become.

4. The inspiration for FDAC was of course the late Nick Crichton, who died in 2018 after a unique judicial career. He learned about problem-solving family courts on visits abroad and he decided to do something about it.  He started the London FDAC in 2008 and there are now 13 FDAC teams working with 39 local authorities and 24 family courts around the country.

5. New ways of doing things can struggle to take hold and measured against the history of the Courts of England and Wales, 16 years is not a long time. I am impressed, and reassured, by the staying power of FDAC in its comparatively short lifetime.

6. FDAC is an integral part of the Family Court, abiding by its laws and procedures.  Every Family Court decision must be fair and welfare-focused, and the proceedings can be complex, because they are so profoundly important to parents, children and society. The problems may stem from drug and/or alcohol abuse, often accompanied by domestic abuse. The insight that we have gained from FDAC is that the powerful machinery of justice can be used not only for judging but also for bringing about change. The crucial combination of a skilled multi-disciplinary team and an engaged judge at a critical moment in a family's life has shown remarkable results, not only for rehabilitation of children to parents, but also for successful placements with other family members that are supported by parents.  At the same time, there are significant savings for the justice system in terms of court time and legal expense, and notable social care savings from having fewer children in care and for less time. And of course, FDAC has the potential to make adoption unnecessary in these cases, not only for these children but also for children yet to be born.

7. There is another aspect of FDAC that seems to me to be important, not just for family justice, but for the legal system as a whole. It concerns the spirit in which the proceedings are conducted. Despite our best intentions, the adversarial aspects of conventional proceedings can leave parents feeling marginalised and mistrustful of public servants, including social workers and judges. Many parents have had desperately difficult lives and have many reasons to be wary of authority. They become ensnared in a repeating cycle of court appearances and feel powerless.  Their experience of FDAC may be the first time that they feel that someone in authority is genuinely trying to help them.  Studies consistently report that these parents find the FDAC process fair, and feel that judges are supportive and respectful, particularly through their direct engagement in non-lawyer reviews. That trust can be transformative, whether or not it leads to family unification. It is no exaggeration to say that it can rewrite the destinies – indeed the entire family trees – of some of the most vulnerable people in society.

8. Last week, I had the opportunity to witness part of this process first-hand when observing two non-lawyer reviews before DJ Stewart Hughan at the Central Family Court. What really came through was the level of commitment from the judge, FDAC team and social workers, working to achieve the best possible outcomes for children and their parents going through this process. It was also clear that the parents felt comfortable opening up to the judge within that setting. I am very grateful to Stewart for having me.

9. I know you will be hearing from a graduate parent from an FDAC later this morning. The account given by someone who has actually experienced the FDAC process is more telling than anyone else's.

10. That said, the judges also have something important to contribute. Judge Andrew Berkley will be speaking about his recent Master's degree on the experiences of judges who sit in FDAC. We do not get many judges doing research about their work, and that such a busy judge has done so speaks volumes.

11. Typically, judges listen to witnesses, but what we are seeing here is judges acting as witnesses, giving evidence about the practical and ethical benefits of FDAC and of their belief that what has been achieved in their courts could be achieved much more widely.

12. Of course, the elephant in the room is funding. As judges, we must decide cases and we can be witnesses on occasions like this, but we cannot act as advocates in relation to the financial priorities of the parties who appear before us, and in care cases that always means the local authority. So, we cannot order local authorities to set up FDAC services: that is a democratic decision for elected officers. However, as judges, we can bear witness to what works and what serves the interests of justice and make that as widely known as possible. We can also draw attention to the very recent research carried out by the Centre for Justice Innovation and Mutual Ventures, with the support of the DfE, which shows the savings that can result from investment.  On average, an FDAC case costs £18,000 but yields £74,000 in savings, the vast majority of which goes to local authorities in predominantly cashable savings.  In short, for every £1 spent on an FDAC team, the taxpayer saves £3.20.

13. Against this background, while FDAC has shown resilience, judges who work closely with it tell me of their concern that, without a renewed lead from central government, local authorities may struggle to establish and sustain FDAC teams with the necessary job security to achieve long term outcomes.  If service levels decline, the entire project may be at risk.  To my mind, that would be a tragic missed opportunity.

14. Sadly, I cannot stay for today's conference, but I salute the judges and others working in this innovative and exciting court. I particularly note the contributions of Judges Perusko, Venables, Burgher and Berkley, but you are all carrying the torch that was lit by Nick Crichton.

15. Special thanks are due to Judge Marianna Hildyard for securing this handsome venue for us today. Thank you also to the Centre for Justice Innovation for helping to organise this event and for the vital training, research, and engagement work that they carry out for FDAC.

16. I am glad that you have this opportunity to share your experiences, problem-solve, and interrogate yourselves. That keen focus on improvement is one of the many things that makes FDAC such an advertisement for all that is best in our public services.