Page 4498 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 18 October 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
matter, albeit as a result of the pressure from the Liberals and the Greens. That was appropriate. The Greens certainly do support the Public Advocate’s finding and particularly the need for further review.
That may not be done by the Public Advocate. I understand that the Auditor-General has it on the work plan as well. But there does need to be further review so that we can better understand the systemic issues and provide a comprehensive response. We also know the Public Advocate suggested that there be a decentralisation of the teams. I am not clear whether that is the best way to go or not, but we should have somebody look at what contemporary practice, what best practice, is to see if that is a model we should go to or not.
I will turn briefly to the diligence requirement articulated in the ministerial code of conduct, which states:
Ministers should exercise due diligence, care and attention, and at all times seek to achieve the highest standards practicable in relation to their duties and responsibilities in their official capacity as a government minister.
The Greens do not believe this was exercised in this instance and this adds to the need for a parliamentary censure over this affair. It is important to articulate the standard to which this parliament holds a minister individually responsible. Look, there is a lot that we do through government that does—there are so many things that a minister will need to keep track of.
We need to be clear that it is about the instructions that a minister gives to his or her department. The minister should be putting down instructions to see that the policy of the government is carried out. There should be rules that the minister lays down to ensure that if there are any important matters, any particularly critical or difficult matters, and particularly where you are dealing with vulnerable children—matters of risk—that they are brought to the minister’s attention and that there is the control of the parliament. It is one of the duties of the parliament to see that the control by the minister is always put into effect. It is for these reasons that the Greens believe it is appropriate to censure the minister both for her conduct and for the conduct of her directorate. Changes simply do need to occur.
To finish, I would like to go to the report. I read the report over the weekend. I have to say that when I got to the first case study of family A, I was extremely angry and in fact had to get up, go outside and go for a walk because it was such a terrible thing that had happened to this family.
The whole intervention just did not go well at all. Again, I do not want to go to the particular workers who were there on the day or dealing with it. I think it is about looking at how the whole system works together. Mrs Dunne has touched on this case and I am sure she felt as upset and angry as I did when reading it.
It did show that there had been some sort of breakdown. There are so many organisations across the territory that could have been brought together. That is where I do have a concern that our caseworkers on our front line are not being given the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video