Page 558 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 9 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
ensures the threshold for inclusion on the register is consistent, as a court order must be in place.
In the bill, use of the term “in need of care and protection” is not clear. The definition “subject to a child protection report”, or “a sibling was the subject of … a child protection report” in the subsequent amendment, is also, we feel, too broad. The terms could refer to a child, where a child report has been made but the parents were seen to be acting protectively and appropriately and the report did not proceed to appraisal. This could include many hundreds or thousands of children over time and it could also refer solely to a child whom the court has, after considering all the evidence made available, declared to be a child in need of care and protection.
The amendment by Ms Hunter also asks that information be recorded if a sibling has been subject to a child protection report. This, again, may have been one report in the previous three years that, for example, was related to a parent-child conflict and not relevant to the child or young person’s death. The government believes this threshold is too broad.
That said, the government does not shy away from the fact that such criteria are important and should be considered when the facts identify there is a link between the death and the care status. The government is of the view that, in seeking to identify trends and patterns without an inherent bias, information must be collected in a broad manner and then analysed objectively to determine any emerging trend or patterns.
Amendment agreed to.
MS BURCH (Brindabella—Minister for Disability, Housing and Community Services, Minister for Children and Young People, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Multicultural Affairs and Minister for Women) (10.40): I move amendment No 10 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 683].
The bill proposes at section 727L(2)(a) that the register must include information as to the cause of death of a child or young person. While medical practitioners may provide a cause of death of the child, the coronial inquiry has its function to make a finding on the basis of all evidence before it as to the cause and manner of death of a child or a young person.
For this reason, the government proposes an amendment to section 727L(3)(a) that will ensure that the register does not include this information until a coronial inquiry or review has been completed. Other reviews may not seek to determine a cause of death, relying either on the coroner to make such a finding or on the basis of medical expertise. The government amendment seeks to ensure that records regarding the cause of death of a child that pre-empt the findings of the coronial or any other review that may consider the issue are not made.
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Convenor, ACT Greens) (10.41): This proposed new section seeks to clarify that coronial and territory review processes should all be completed before any information is included on the register. The Greens agree with this amendment.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video