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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 03 Hansard (Wednesday, 10 March 2004) . . Page.. 975 ..

Ms Gallagher on 11 December 2003 advising her of the breaches of the Children and Young People Act and referring specifically to the question to you from the CSSE committee.

Attorney, why was there this sudden burst of activity on this issue after Mr Hargreaves sent the CSSE question of 8 December 2003 to you?

MR STANHOPE: To some extent, actually almost to an entire extent, Mr Cornwell asks me to delve into the minds of those that actually precipitated that activity. I honestly cannot say what the motivation was for anybody that led to the activity that you have referred to. If you are asking me why a particular brief was written or why a letter was written, I honestly have no idea, excepting, as Ms Gallagher has explained in close detail over the last couple of month, that it was at the time of the tabling of a response in relation to these issues that Ms Gallagher’s department briefed her on the existence of an ongoing concern, namely, the concern identified by the Community Advocate and the reports that, likewise, have been a matter of some debate in this place that Ms Gallagher acted.

You have outlined a history of the two or three days prior to Ms Gallagher being formally advised by her departmental head of the particular issue that was the subject of these concerns. It may be, Mr Cornwell, that it was as a result, as you say, of the question that Mr Hargreaves asked on behalf of the committee. I do not know; I have no recollection of that.

I have a recollection of the question that Mr Hargreaves asked of Ms McGregor. My recollection is essentially as a result of having subsequently read the Hansard transcript, I have to say. It is not a question that I took particular note of at the time. I do not know whether my sanguinity was a result, Mr Cornwell, of the fact that you, sitting in the committee and also being part and parcel of that discussion, did not respond in any way or ask any questions of your own that may have led me to pay the level of attention that I might otherwise have done.

I cannot answer for you either, Mr Cornwell, in terms of your complete absence of response on that occasion. I simply cannot delve into your mind. That would be interesting, but I am afraid I cannot; nor can I speak for the motivation of those others that took the steps that they then took, just as Ms Gallagher has sought to explain but cannot fully explain the timing or the sequence of events that confronted her in relation to this issue.

I have watched, listened and responded to your questions in relation to this issue, but the fact of the matter is—and we have explained it and acknowledged our deep regret—that there was over the last two years a range of signals in relation to an ongoing administrative failure, namely, a failure to respond appropriately to a legislative requirement in relation to the need to report actions being undertaken in family services to the Community Advocate.

That is regrettable. It is unacceptable. The government has expressed repeatedly that it is unacceptable. It has expressed repeatedly its deep regret that a number of signals that perhaps should have been accepted and responded to were not. It has expressed its regret

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