More "Law"?

(from "Law Society pushes for new court building" by ABC Newcastle )

Local Law Society president Catherine Henry says the much-needed court complex would benefit the community as well as the legal fraternity.

"At present, any matters that fall within the areas of immigration, bankruptcy, trade practices administrative law, they're not traditional areas of practice in Newcastle," he said.

"The reason for that is that we haven't got the facilities available for those cases to be heard here, but there's no reason why they can't be in the future if we had the proper court facilities for them to be heard."

Does Newcastle really need a new federal court building? -- Who knows? It's hard to miss how the article is written though. There is some legitimate doubt that issues of "immigration, bankruptcy, trade practices administrative law" are something the residents of Newcastle are chomping at the bit to deal with though.
There are many other venues for such matters to be heard. Are other regional courtrooms overwhelmed with these matters from Newcastle? Probably not.
So why build a federal court in Newcastle?

It would benefit the resume of the local senator, Sharon Grierson; and the resume of the President of the Newcastle Law Society, (Mr?) Catherine Henry. (Did you notice the reference to "he said"?)
And it will bring more lawyers to Newcastle -- presumably benefitting the local economy. And more than anything else, it will benefit the legal profession in the area as the anonymous author states.
Such sublety.

The Law Society is certainly there for the benefit of lawyers and the legal profession. The Law Society is always concerned with the quantity of law. Too bad it has few concerns about the quality of law.
There's that "too hard" bin again.