Page 513 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 8 March 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Convenor, ACT Greens) (3.17): I would echo some of Mrs Dunne’s words here. I find that this update presents us with nothing new. We already know about the 11 key themes that the minister has reported that came from young people and service providers. We already know that young people want continuity in their support and the same workers and adults around them to do that, that they want stable housing and accommodation options, education and living skills, and they want to be included in processes concerning them and information about what is affecting them.
The problem with this issue is that yet again we are rehashing what we have already read in many national and local reports. One of the references made in this statement was to extending the age limit for supporting young people who are transitioning from care from 18 to 25 years. But it presents this as one option; it does not say, “We will do that; we will follow it.” There is nothing concrete here. It says, “Well, that could be one thing we might look at.”
Then it goes on to talk about a framework. I hear this a lot out in the community sector: there are frameworks. Every time we need something rejigged or whatever, we say that we are putting in place a framework. But a framework is not commitment to funding of services and programs. It is not. It is simply not. It does make me a little concerned, actually, because I am starting to see “framework” as a term that is used to basically rejig systems without any real thought about whether they are working properly or not. It is not about putting in more money; it is about trying to do more with less. And, as we know, when you are trying to do more with less you tend to have a pretty poor system out there. You can get some pretty poor outcomes.
We know that there have been so many reports about this group. There is the annual Create report card about the poor outcomes for children who have been in our out-of-home care system. They are many times more likely to be homeless. Young women after they leave the system are many times more likely to be pregnant within a very short time, many times more likely to suffer violence and so forth. That is why we do need to be taking seriously this whole issue of extending that support from the current 18 years of age up until 25 years of age.
That is why I find this disappointing—because there is not any commitment to real progress in this area. All we are committing to is this thing called a framework. I do wonder what this means when it says:
… this Government is committed to enhancing services for young people transitioning from care by developing a realigned and integrated system response to support young people as they transition from care.
What does that actually mean? I do not know what that actually means. I cannot see the services behind that. I cannot see the policy responses behind it. I have to say that I am disappointed. I had hoped for a little more in this response when I received it earlier in the day.
Another thing I want to pick up on that I was concerned about is around planning within the department for transition from care and supporting these young people. It says:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video