Page 2894 - Week 08 - Thursday, 17 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I consider that the availability of administrative review of such key decisions would improve accountability for decisions that have a significant impact on the lives of children and young people, and their families and carers and would promote high quality evidence-based decision-making by CPS [now CYPS].
Another powerful voice has been Legal Aid ACT. In their submission to the Glanfield inquiry they directly identified the lack of an external oversight body for CYPS decisions as a threat to child protection. They then recommended that the territory follow other Australian jurisdictions by giving ACAT the responsibility to review important CYPS decisions, including where children live and whom they have contact with. Legal Aid suggested in particular that Western Australia offers an especially robust model to follow, providing both independent internal review and external administrative review. As noted by Legal Aid, current internal review at CYPS does not meet the standard recommended by the Australian Administrative Review Council and, even if it did, internal review without access to external review does not provide accountability.
When parents, carers, and agencies are joined by Legal Aid ACT, a former Children and Young People Commissioner and a former official visitor for children and young people it is well and truly time for the ACT government to finally listen and make changes. The minister has noted that child protection workers deserve the ACT community’s full support. I could not agree more. They have incredibly difficult jobs. I therefore want to emphasise that the concerns I have shared today are not because either citizens or experts do not appreciate our territory’s child protection. Rigorous internal and external review mechanisms are essential to provide the support and protection needed for those who daily engage in this kind of difficult work.
The minister has told us this morning that representatives from both JACS and CSD have been meeting to consider what decisions made by CYPS should be subject to enhanced internal or external review. I am satisfied that this important analysis is in progress and hope very much that it will not take much longer. It has already been 16 months since the recommendation for this review was issued. No doubt those involved wish to be both thorough and cautious, and they should be.
At the same time, I would like some assurance that this matter is one that has been prioritised by the ministers who oversee these two directorates. I would also like to be assured that issues of contact, though very important, are not the only ones being considered for potential changes regarding review. In the meantime, the minister has tried to assure us this morning that other established independent mechanisms are already in place to perform oversight and external scrutiny functions of the child protection system. If these established mechanisms were functioning as needed, we would not have so many recommendations suggesting that we need more and better reviews of important CYPS decisions.
The minister has mentioned the Children’s Court and other courts. I remind this Assembly of the Glanfield inquiry’s conclusion that decisions regarding a child’s placement are legally not subject to judicial review in this territory. The minister has also mentioned the Office of the Public Advocate and the Children and Young
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video