Page 4488 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 18 October 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I raised the issue of a possible breach of the law with the minister and the Public Advocate. Only then did the minister do something—she commissioned a report—even though we know through her answers at question time that the responsible minister knew of the breaches of the law as far back as July.
Last Friday the Public Advocate brought down her report, in which she writes about the deficiencies in systems and applications of due processes by the Community Services Directorate that resulted in breaches of the Children and Young People Act no less than 24 times. Let us hear what the Public Advocate said. She said on page 31 that the agency:
… was used repeatedly by CPS to provide residential care support services for children the majority of whom the Director General held parental responsibility.
Further on page 31 she said:
… CPS was aware of the risks in using an agency that was not a “suitable entity” in this matter, the history speaks for itself.
She continued: “It is disingenuous to state that” the agency “were only used when there was ‘no-one else’ when this occurred with twenty-four children.” On page 36 she said: “There is no doubt that CPS knew” that the agency “was not approved as a suitable entity, and yet they approached that agency requesting that they provide services … that could only legally be provided by a suitable entity, following all the checks for approval as such.” She went on to say: “Further CPS engaged” another agency “to provide residential care on a number of occasions”, utilising their residences as ‘places of care’, knowing that” they were “not approved as a provider of residential care under the C&YP Act.”
The Public Advocate told us last Friday that the minister’s directorate broke the law, knew that the law was being broken, and did it no fewer than 24 times. The minister has told us that she knew at least in July, but those placements continued even after this minister knew.
This is the directorate presided over by Minister Burch, who, according to Nugget Coombs:
… remains responsible to … Cabinet … and to Parliament for decisions made and actions performed under … delegation …
In the 1970s we had this convention spelt out to us by Nugget Coombs, one of our foremost public officials. Let us hear it again:
… remains responsible to … Cabinet colleagues and to Parliament for decisions made and actions performed under … delegation …
In the history of motions of want of confidence in the ACT Legislative Assembly, there has never been a more serious case than this. This minister has presided over a directorate which, over the last year or so, has breached the law no fewer than
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video