Page 477 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 20 February 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR HANSON: Minister, who exactly is the law designed to protect when the law prevents a family revealing details of their interactions with this government, even when they wish to?
MS STEPHEN-SMITH: The primary people that the law is designed to protect are children and young people. The interests of children and young people are first and foremost throughout the Children and Young People Act.
MRS KIKKERT: Minister, what assurance do Canberrans have that these failures will ever be fully addressed and not repeated when the details of this government’s policy failures cannot be known?
MS STEPHEN-SMITH: I completely reject the premise of Mrs Kikkert’s question, but I would note that these matters have actually gone to court. It is the jurisdiction of the court to review decisions. When the Children’s Court makes a decision about a care and protection order, that decision can be appealed to the Supreme Court; that matter can then go to a court of appeal, and it can be returned to the Children’s Court. That is the way that we ensure that the decisions made by child and youth protection services and the views of child and youth protection services can be tested in a robust way.
I note that it is recognised within the system that intervening in a family’s life in order to ensure a child’s safety does impact on people’s human rights. That is why there is comprehensive oversight in place which includes the Human Rights Commission, official visitors, the ACT Ombudsman and the Public Advocate, who can seek access to information held by child and youth protection services on such matters. Indeed when matters go to court the Public Advocate is informed of all such applications and has the power to intervene in proceedings. The child is also separately represented—separate from both their parents and child and youth protection services—to ensure that their best interests are paramount in the decisions of the court.
Children and young people—care and protection
MRS JONES: Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister for Children, Youth and Families. Minister, you have often noted that the increasing number of children in out of home care is not unique to the ACT. However, in stark contrast to New South Wales, the number of Canberra children in care has jumped 23 per cent since 2015. In Scotland, for example, there has been a reduction in numbers of “looked-after” children for five consecutive years. Meanwhile the percentage of ACT kids in care who have been there for five or more consecutive years has grown from 37 to 41 per cent over the past five years. Minister, is it time to admit that, as reflected in outcomes, the government’s current out of home care strategy does not match best practice either in Australia or overseas?
MS STEPHEN-SMITH: I thank Mrs Jones for the question. It is indeed an interesting one. There are a number of factors that come into play here. Mrs Jones reflected on the fact that there has been an increase in the number of children who are in care for an extended period of time.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video