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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Thursday, 4 March 2004) . . Page.. 719 ..

many loyal and dedicated people who not only do their duty but also go above and beyond that call of duty to look after the interests of children in our community. I know that many of them are going through a very difficult time at the moment. They are very stressed and they have become ill because they feel that the errors and irresponsibility of a few are causing them to be painted with a very negative brush.

I will read an excerpt from report 3, SCCSSE’s committee report, which was tabled in August 2003. The reason I read this is not for the welfare of those in the departments who are doing a good job but for some in this place who have tried to apportion responsibility for who knew what and when to some committees and their members. You have all read this information; you all knew about it. What did you do about it? We did the work; we tabled the report; somebody did not read it.

Someone went on television and said, “We don’t really read those things. They’re not always that important.” I am paraphrasing there. I recall that my fellow committee member Ms Dundas was shocked at that response. I think it was the Chief Minister who made light of the importance of reports. I was shocked, as Ms Dundas was shocked, given that we are 17 members elected to do a job we take seriously for a community that put us here and not for a self-serving, indulgent agenda. I will read from page 52 of the August 2003 report. I hope the Chief Minister is listening. I quote:

23.23 The Committee is extremely concerned at reports Family Services has failed to comply with its obligations under the Act.

24.24 For example, the OCA in its Annual Report notes that the Chief Executive is out of compliance with the Act for not forwarding on to OCA reports of abuse and neglect about children in care.

It must be noted that, since the introduction of the Act in 2000, the Chief Executive has consistently failed to meet her statutory requirements pursuant to Section 162—despite a number of written requests by the OCA to do so, and despite a number of commitments on behalf of the Chief Executive to do so.

This is from a committee that did its job. On page 53 it goes on to say:

27.27 It is disturbing that the OCA had to make 45 applications to the Children’s Court in 2001-02 for an order that a report be provided. No less disturbing is the statement that the Chief Executive responded to just 3% of all letters written by the OCA in regard to concerns over Review Reports.

That is not only disgraceful, but it makes me shudder to think that in the Office of the Community Advocate we have a woman who takes her role very seriously and who in good faith carries out her job thinking that her role and the information that she provides to the department will be taken on board, particularly when it involves the vulnerable in this community—our children—and it is ignored.

What does this woman have to do to be taken seriously and for people to take notice? Does she have to go out there and scream and yell like a lunatic in order for someone to take her seriously? Why isn’t the fact that she reported this information enough? Why is it that some members in this place tried to apportion blame to this committee—also for

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