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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 08 Hansard (Wednesday, 4 August 2004) . . Page.. 3439 ..

Ms Gallagher. They worked long and hard to put this together. So that is a little sad. You also referred to the capacity to undermine, processes that are flawed, no clear accountability, at odds with the current law. I can only put that down to really political statements because it is going to be interesting to see what the commissioner for children and young people will do that the outline of my bill was not going to do anyway.

We must protect society’s most vulnerable. Members have said this will do nothing to protect the vulnerable. Again I would argue that, but I will wait for that debate another day.

To the Democrats, I thank you for your comments. Moving away from the traditional unit—I think that was what you said, Ms Dundas—might be best for the child. Again, I have said, “What happens then to the family members?” I think that that is a concern. In the bill that I was proposing the best interests of the child, the interests of the family unit, whoever they may be, would be brought into account. I still believe decisions must be made about children’s future with as much input from the parents and/or carers as possible.

Indeed, I have had at least two cases come across my desk where young people have been in the care of a carer not the biological parent and have been removed and taken back to that parent quite at the behest of not doing so by the carer. That is why I am saying that we should be inclusive. I hope that the government’s drafting will include issues such as consulting with family members or family unit, whatever description we want.

It is interesting to note that page 18 of the foreword of the report on the audit and case review we have recently received in this place is exactly my reason for wanting a commissioner for the family, not simply a commissioner for young people. Whilst I fully support the need for children to have a strong voice, I am concerned that we ensure that there is a balanced approach. There must be a balanced approach to it. I hope, as I say, when the debate on the government’s proposal comes on, we will be able to see clearly what they propose. Again, I have said we are not suggesting that there be two commissioners. I have talked about that.

Mrs Cross talked about the establishment of more bureaucratic structures, which has been mentioned by a few members; so it is going to be really interesting in this place when we see what the members talk about. Will they feel the same about the establishment of the government’s proposed commissioner for children and young people? I am quite confused about some of the comments there. We are already talking about a bureaucratic structure.

I will close there. I again thank members and sincerely thank my staff and Parliamentary Counsel for working so hard on this with me. I look forward to the debate on the government’s proposed commissioner for children and young people.

Question put:

That this bill be agreed to in principle

The Assembly voted—

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