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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Tuesday, 22 June 2004) . . Page.. 2297 ..

the Community Advocate who appeared with the Chief Minister on that day. My understanding of the comments is that they had concerns about two children and that those concerns were related to information that may or may not have been included in the information that they had been given. The staff of the OCA went on to say that because they were aware of these children and knew them they understood their situation.

I was not there, but my recollection of Hansard is that that had led them to believe that the children were not unsafe, but the point that the witnesses were making was that it should not be down to them because they know the children; that it would alleviate their concerns, if they had any, if they were able, as they should be, to make those decisions from the information provided to them. That, of course, is something that has been articulated in the Vardon report in relation to the inadequate reporting of data in some cases.

I have not had representations from the OCA about those two children, but I do not necessarily believe that they would come to me because, under the act, it would be more appropriate that they go to the chief executive holding the delegations under that act. I have seen some correspondence from the OCA which, while careful with the language, confirms that, on the analysis that they have done and to the extent that it can be said that children are safe, they do not in those cases they have looked at in relation to section 162 (2), as far as they can work out from the information there—the email I saw from them did have caveats to it—have any further concerns; or any concerns that they had have been addressed by children, youth and family support.

MS DUNDAS: Minister, you indicated that you would expect the OCA to raise concerns specifically with the chief executive as the holder of that power and responsibility for the children.

MR SPEAKER: Come to the question, please.

MS DUNDAS: At what stage or where in the process would you expect the Office of the Community Advocate to raise concerns about individual children with you as the minister, not just about missing reports and the administrative problems? Is there any point at which you would expect the Office of the Community Advocate to contact you about children?

MS GALLAGHER: That is a difficult one because I am not the person with parental responsibility for these children, but when I met with the Office of the Community Advocate in January or February, whilst they were receiving the first lot of section 162(2) reports, I did say to the Community Advocate that, if she had any immediate concerns about children, I would like to know about them and that the department should know about them as well so that we could have immediate action taken to address any concerns she had.

I had one conversation with her about some children she was concerned about. She and her staff went out to investigate the files personally the following workday and the feedback was that she was satisfied as much as she could be through this process. Again, inadequate record keeping and concerns had led her to be concerned about those children, but that was the only situation at that point. Under the legislation, it is more

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