Page 1726 - Week 06 - Thursday, 30 July 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Strait Islander children on a care and protection order for every 1,000 children in the ACT, which compares to a national average of just 66. I think that close to 50 per cent above the national average is a searing indictment of our performance, in a First World capital of a First World nation, in how we treat Indigenous people. I think that it is important, especially on a day when we have made such a symbolic gesture towards our Indigenous fellows, that we should also resolve that this disparity in relation to care and protection for our Indigenous children. It needs to be addressed as a matter of priority.
One of the take-out messages in the report—and I am glad that Ms Cody touched on this in her comments—is actually something that was reflected in the maternity services inquiry. We need to have—and the term was used—a needs-led care and protection system, not a service-led care and protection system. The care and protection system is not there for the people who provide the care and protection system; the care and protection system is there for the children and young people, their parents and families and the wider community, to ensure that children are safe.
One of the messages that we heard through this inquiry—and I think it is worth noting that getting this inquiry up in the first place was, from my experience, like extracting teeth; there was backwards and forwards, and backwards and forwards, and the government was very reluctant to have this inquiry—
Ms Stephen-Smith: Not for part 2; that is not true.
MRS DUNNE: The minister will have her opportunity to speak and respond to this, but at the moment I am putting forward the perspective of the opposition. Mrs Kikkert and I worked very hard to have a whole suite of inquiries included. There are two inquiries, of which this is part 2. The whole process of getting this inquiry up was like extracting teeth and the backwards and forwards and the reluctance of the government in particular and to some extent the crossbench, who eventually came around to having an inquiry into this space, was quite marked. I am glad that it has been overcome.
The committee has, by way of context, produced an interim report on part 1 of the inquiry, which relates to an individual case. Yes, it is unusual for a committee like this to inquire into an individual case, and we recognise that. We were also looking not to cast blame in relation to the individual case but to look at the systemic issues that arose.
One of the systemic issues which arose, and which is at the heart of this inquiry, which is about information sharing in the care and protection service, is the power imbalance in the care and protection service and how disempowered families are in relation to what appears to be a behemoth of an organisation that is opaque to them. Every witness that we heard from gave testimony of the extent to which the care and protection service in the ACT is opaque and that when there is opacity there is no assurance of a proper practice and that there is no assurance of, as Ms Cody and the committee have spoken about, there being trust in the system.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video