Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 12 Hansard (19 November) . . Page.. 3826 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

to review several areas, including the grounds and the process for removal of abused and neglected children, and the process of review of child protection orders, and we need to formulate an ability to transfer ACT orders to other jurisdictions and to allow orders from other jurisdictions to be administered in the Territory.

Mr Speaker, we also need to consider the adoption of family group conferencing - a successful innovation emanating from New Zealand and operating in several Australian States. We must further consider whether it is timely to adopt the Aboriginal placement principle which is already a part of our much more modern Adoption Act 1993. These are a few, but certainly not an exhaustive listing, of the issues that will be addressed in the review. The Department of Education and Training and the Children's, Youth and Family Services Bureau are in the process of recruiting a project officer to coordinate the review. That project officer will assist the bureau to consult with key stakeholders and prepare a document in the form of a draft Bill for community consultation, formal consultation, by June 1997.

The review of the Children's Services Act will ensure our legislation is completely geared to the best interests of all the children of the Territory. It is something that is long overdue, and this important amendment which we will pass today brings the ACT child welfare legislation into line with modern practice and, leading into a review of the Children's Services Act, merits endorsement. I thank members for their comments and their support.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.

Bill agreed to.

[COGNATE BILL:

Debate resumed from 26 September 1996, on motion by Mr Humphries:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

MR SPEAKER: Is it the wish of the Assembly to debate this order of the day concurrently with the Air Pollution (Amendment) Bill (No. 2) 1996? There being no objection, that course will be followed. I remind members that in debating order of the day No. 2 they may also address their remarks to order of the day No. 3.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .