Department for Child Protection, $721,449,000

Membership:

Mr Teague substituted for Hon. J.A.W. Gardner.

Mrs Pearce substituted for Ms Thompson.

Minister:

Hon. K.A. Hildyard, Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence, Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing.

Departmental Advisers:

Ms C.Taylor, Chief Executive Officer, Department for Child Protection.

Ms F. Ward, Deputy Chief Executive Officer, Department for Child Protection.

Ms J. Male, Chief Financial Officer, Department for Child Protection.

Ms T. Armiento, Acting Chief Human Resources Officer, Department for Child Protection.

Mr T. Rich, Parliament and Cabinet Coordinator, Department for Child Protection.

The CHAIR: Welcome to today's hearing for Estimates Committee B. I respectfully acknowledge the traditional owners of this land on which the committee meets today and the custodians of the sacred lands of our state.

The estimates committees are a relatively informal procedure and, as such, there is no need to stand to ask or answer questions. I understand the minister and the lead speaker for the opposition have agreed an approximate time for the consideration of proposed payments, which will facilitate a change of departmental advisers. Can the minister and the lead speaker for the opposition confirm that the timetable for today's proceeding previously distributed is accurate?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes.

The CHAIR: All good, member for Heysen?

Mr TEAGUE: Yes.

The CHAIR: Excellent. Changes to committee membership will be notified as they occur. Members should ensure the Chair is provided with a completed request to be discharged form. If the minister undertakes to supply information at a later date, it must be submitted to the Clerk Assistant via the answer to questions mailbox no later than Friday 2 September 2022.

I propose to allow both the minister and the lead speaker for the opposition to make opening statements of about 10 minutes each, if they so wish. There will be a flexible approach to giving the call for asking questions. A member who is not a committee member may ask a question at the discretion of the Chair.

All questions are to be directed to the minister, not to the minister's advisers. The minister may refer questions to an adviser for a response. Questions must be based on lines of expenditure in the budget papers and must be identifiable or referenced. Members unable to complete their questions during the proceedings may submit them as questions on notice for inclusion in the assembly Notice Paper. I remind members that the rules of debate in the house apply in the committee. Consistent with the rules of the house, photography by members from the chamber floor is not permitted while the committee is sitting.

Ministers and members may not table documents before the committee; however, documents can be supplied to the Chair for distribution. The incorporation of material in Hansard is permitted on the same basis as applies in the house; that is, that it is purely statistical and limited to one page in length.

The committee's examination will be broadcast in the same manner as sittings of the house are broadcast, through the IPTV system within Parliament House via the webstream link to the internet and the Parliament of South Australia video-on-demand broadcast system.

The portfolio is the Department for Child Protection. The minister appearing is the Minister for Child Protection. I declare the proposed payments open for examination. I call on the minister to make a statement, if the minister so wishes, and to introduce advisers. I call on the lead speaker for the opposition to make a statement, if the member wishes. I call on the members for questions.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you very much to all committee members for participating in this really important process. I start by acknowledging that, here in this place, we are gathered together on Kaurna land. In making that acknowledgement, I acknowledge the many Aboriginal leaders who share wisdom and culture and who advocate for years, decades and lifetimes for children and young people.

I am joined today by Ms Cathy Taylor, Chief Executive Officer, Department for Child Protection; Ms Fiona Ward, Deputy Chief Executive Officer; Ms Joanne Male, Chief Financial Officer; Ms Tina Armiento, Acting Chief Human Resources Officer; and Mr Tom Rich, Parliament and Cabinet Coordinator. I thank each of them and their teams for their incredibly hard work towards the budget and this estimates process.

I make a short statement to start this process about the significant challenges and opportunities ahead of us as a state, and indeed as a nation, in child protection and wellbeing. My responsibility is in child protection and the investment the Malinauskas Labor government is making in the system to improve the safety and wellbeing of vulnerable children and young people in our community. As minister, I am deeply committed to keeping children in care in my mind and in my heart as I undertake my responsibilities—responsibilities that I feel incredibly honoured to have.

Every South Australian child deserves to be safe, cared for, nurtured and loved. It is important to note that that ideal is not something one person, or indeed one department, can do on their own. It is everyone's responsibility to ensure that children are safe, well and free from abuse or neglect. Shockingly, one in three South Australian children in their lifetime now come into contact with the child protection system in some way.

The numbers of Aboriginal children and young people in the system and in out-of-home care remain disproportionately high. We have many wonderful foster and kinship carers supporting vulnerable children, but there are still challenges in recruitment and retention of carers impacting on the capacity for children and young people to be placed in family-based care. To make real inroads into these issues we need a whole-of-government and whole-of-community approach.

The ABC news report earlier in the week about the enduring issues faced in the child protection system across the country was an urgent call to deepen and intensify our collective work to improve outcomes for children and young people and keep them safe. I look forward to working with the new federal government as key partners in this crucial effort. I acknowledge the incredibly courageous people who spoke in that news report.

Amongst many urgent actions required to meet these challenges is the need to develop deeper community engagement with, and understanding of, the complexity and interconnectedness of issues that families face. Our collective endeavours sit squarely in a broader context of complexity and challenge. There is inherent risk in child protection, a risk that workers and all involved in the system carry through every interaction and decision they make. I am very grateful to all who work every day to make a difference in very challenging circumstances.

We must change and deepen the public discourse and ensure that there is a better understanding of the risk and tension that the system carries. We must ensure that the oft-repeated mantra that child protection is everybody's business is genuinely brought to life if we are to shift from a community attitude of reporting as the first and sometimes only response to a culture of supporting families, children and young people. We must strive for joined-up efforts, including effective prevention and early intervention actions that genuinely strengthen families and improve outcomes for children and young people so they can physically, mentally and emotionally thrive.

It is important to acknowledge that, as a whole community, we face challenges that have a direct impact on the safety of children. Domestic and family violence, poverty, unemployment, intergenerational trauma, drug and alcohol misuse and cyber-based crime, including the direct exploitation of children and the ability for predators to communicate with children and young people through technology, are issues we collectively face and must collectively address.

The continuing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic can also not be underestimated and has had an impact on all parts of government service delivery, including the recruitment and retention of foster carers and the safety of workers and children and young people in care. I thank all carers, who generously open their hearts, homes and lives to children and young people. Workforce challenges persist as child protection workers face on a daily basis that tension between working to strengthen families and build their capacity and the need to intervene or remove children when their safety is at risk. This is hard, complex work.

The Malinauskas Labor government is alive to all these challenges, and we will be doing all we can to address them. Difficult issues may still arise, but we are focused on doing what is within our power to prevent issues arising, to be open and transparent when they do and to always learn and rigorously examine systems, procedures and processes to ensure they work in the best possible way to support and empower children and young people.

The task ahead is hard, but we are viscerally determined to try to make change that genuinely improves children's and young people's lives. The investment into child protection in this budget reflects that. The measures in this budget are also complemented by a range of other activities that will seek to collaboratively develop solutions using evidence and expert advice in partnership with stakeholders, including, most importantly, children and young people, their families and carers.

The government in this budget is investing an additional $128.9 million into the child protection system to meet the cost of caring for more children and young people in non-family based care and to fund the anticipated increase in statutory responses to keep children and young people safe from abuse and neglect. We are increasing funding for services for children and young people in care and their caregivers as well as providing additional support to young people leaving care and transitioning to jobs, housing, further education or other life opportunities through a $7.5 million investment program over the next four years.

We are also working collaboratively with other parts of government and key stakeholders and service providers in the community to ensure that we are providing the right kind of support and resourcing to intervene with at-risk families at crucial times to build their capacity and capabilities. Underpinning every element of what we do is making sure that we hear the voice of children and young people, foster and kinship carers and advocates in informing our policies and decision-making. I thank each of them for their courage and their voice.

I also take the opportunity to acknowledge and thank the tireless workers of the Department for Child Protection, who respond with compassion and diligence to the needs of our community as they undertake their work. We have committed to real efforts to fill vacancies, improve ratios and develop a workforce plan in consultation with workers, their unions and community organisations to ensure sustainable, safe staffing levels for the future. We have already taken significant steps to improve notification processes in a way that will ensure continuous system examination and improvement.

This estimates committee provides a welcome opportunity to explore how this budget is investing in the child protection system to drive better outcomes for children and young people. I look forward to exploring the issues with the committee and thank again all members of it and you, Mr Chair.

The CHAIR: Thank you, minister. Member for Heysen, do you have a statement or questions?

Mr TEAGUE: No statement; I will go straight to questions. Minister, starting with an overview in relation to budget measures, I turn to Budget Paper 5 at pages 16 and 17, where we see the budget measures for child protection conveniently set out over the course of those two pages.

The minister has just adverted to $128.9 million in budget measures funding over the course of the forward estimates. While we are at it, I might refer in that regard to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 95 to illustrate that working backwards over the last two financial years as well as the provision for the forward estimates. In that context, I ask the minister for any observation about what we have seen, a roughly $120 million increase in appropriation from 2020-21 to this year's budget and a similar increase over the period of forward estimates.

This is not a question that is anything other than an opportunity for an observation. To what extent is that growth in appropriation a sign of failure as opposed to a sign of success? Would the minister provide any overall indication about the way in which this further increase of $128.9 million over the forward estimates will be deployed?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I think you are asking for some general observations, to use your words. I understand the reference to Budget Paper 5. I presume that on page 95 you are just talking in general terms in terms of the—

Mr TEAGUE: No, just for convenient reference, I am talking to the first line of the table headed 'Statement of comprehensive income' on page 95, where one sees the appropriation working back to 2021 as a way to illustrate going back and going forward. We have seen this really extraordinary growth in appropriation in relation to the department. I have couched it in terms of whether that is a sign of success or failure, and I do not mean anything more than that. I just invite the minister to make observations about what this further increase in appropriation over the course of the forward estimates is going to do and what plans the minister has for deploying those further resources.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I will just make a couple of general comments, and they are similar to the ones that I made in the opening statement. We do face particular complexities in child protection. One of those complexities is the growing number of children and young people who come into contact with the child protection system at some point in their lives. I mentioned the figure, which I constantly feel incredibly shocked by, that one in three children now in South Australia comes into contact with the child protection system at some point in their lives.

Also, the number of children who are in care has continued to grow and that trajectory has continued over the last four to five years. As I said in my opening statement, there is a constant tension, a constant balance that we grapple with in child protection, and that is the balance between making sure that we do whatever we can to prevent and intervene as early as possible when families are struggling, to support them to build their capacity, and recognising when children are not safe and removing children and taking them into care. That is the constant tension that the child protection workforce deals with. When I say the workforce I mean all of those in community organisations, and in family support services as well.

For the first time, with the investment of $128.9 million, the funding for the workforce will be commensurate with that growth of the number of children in care. It has not been commensurate with it over the past four years, but this funding will certainly ensure that there is now enough capacity in the workforce to begin to address the shortfall that has existed in the past. On that note, what I would say to the member for Heysen is that one of the things we do have to carry, as well as investing the $128.9 million, is the efficiency measure that the previous government applied to child protection of $4.5 million per year.

In contrast, we are not applying any new savings measures to child protection. That was made really clear by the Treasurer in his speech, and it is very clear in all of the papers that we are investing an additional $128.9 million, in contrast to the $4.5 million annual efficiency dividend that was made by the former government. That $128.9 million will focus on building workforce capacity, but alongside that we have also invested $7.5 million to ensure that a range of other programs are implemented that grow the voice of children and young people in care, that grow the voice of carers, that help to break the cycle by investing in post-care support, so that when children and young people are close to leaving care they have the necessary support to explore new study, work and housing pathways.

So, alongside that investment in the workforce and all of the services associated with that, we are also focusing other investment into other supports and services that will sit alongside that.

Mr TEAGUE: In those circumstances—you might describe it as a realistic outlook—this anticipates, does it not, a continuing rise in the number of children in care over the course of the forward estimates? Why should it not be regarded as an admission of defeat at this point to be providing for those significant increases, as it were, fairly evenly over each of the course of the years of the forward estimates?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I guess I would say again that the investment that we are making for the first time actually is commensurate with the growth that has been occurring over the last four to five years. Previously, funding did not reflect that growth and now we have funding that actually reflects the growth. What I can absolutely tell you also is that I am highly aspirational about the need for change, and the $128.9 million investment is, of course, significant.

As I said, it is also commensurate with growth, but there is a range of other things that we are also investing in. They include intensive family support services and, as I said, carer advocacy, and they include support for children and young people as they leave care, to help break that cycle. Sadly, we know that cycles can continue if there is not positive intervention, so I am highly aspirational that this budget and the matters that we are contemplating are also focused on positive outcomes for the future through that range of other investments that we are making.

Mr TEAGUE: Would you include, minister, in the range of those aspirations—I am sorry, did you have something more to add?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Sorry, we were just going to add one other—

Ms WARD: I was just going to add in: I think it is a really important question. I think what we have seen, which is really promising, is a downward trend on growth. There has actually been a downward trend on growth in the recent years, which is continuing. You will see that in the forward estimates, so the ambition is actually factored into the budget: 5 per cent obviously with the current financial year, then down to 4 to 3 to 1 to 1. This is actually anticipating the minister's ambition but also, I think, the potential positive impact that we are already seeing through early intervention services: intensive family support services, family group conferencing and other family-led decision-making approaches, which are actually succeeding at the moment.

Mr TEAGUE: Thank you. It might be in percentage terms, but in absolute dollar terms we see provision rising from just short of $22 million in the current budget to just short of $30 million in 2025-26. Minister, with that further observation in mind, will you regard it as, if not a key performance indicator, a sign of some modicum of success if we see in future years those provisions in the estimates actually revise down? Do you have an objective in that regard?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: In terms of reducing the number of children coming into care? Is that your question?

Mr TEAGUE: I am getting to that, but in terms of the sheer dollars, do you have an objective associated with—these are needs-based funds, right?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: I simply ask you the question, maybe somewhat unusually in the context of this department: is there a sense in which provision to some lesser degree over the course of the forward estimates might be viewed as a sign of success? You could deploy the funds very capably elsewhere if the growth needs are not there. I mean, you are not aiming for growth, in other words.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: No, of course we are not aiming for growth. I guess I would just add some further context around the growth, which may be helpful. The growth in placement is impacted by a whole range of factors. These include the rate of new entries, of course, in terms of more children coming in to care because of the need to be kept safe; the rate of reunification; the age of the population in care in terms of when children and young people leave care; and also broader, across-government early intervention services.

According to DCP's financial reporting to the Department of Treasury and Finance as at the end of April 2022, the estimated 2021-22 full year average growth rate of children and young people entering care is 4.8 per cent based on an increase from the 2020-21 reported figure of 4,496 to a forecast end-of-year figure of 4,710, while the 2020-21 growth was 7.7 per cent.

Although the number of children and young people in care has grown, the department has also predominantly increased family-based care placements, so of the estimated additional 214 children and young people in care in 2021-22 compared with 2020-21, 167 children were placed in family-based care.

I guess I make those comments because these issues are incredibly complex. Of course, we will continue to keep working to reduce the number of children and young people in care; we will continue to look at the interconnectedness between the range of complex and challenging issues that give rise to connection with child protection; and we will continue to work to ensure that we can have more children, should they come into the purview of child protection, in family-based care.

I can assure you that we will continue to work and use every effort across the department, using a whole-of-government, whole-of-community approach to continue that downward trend. In the meantime, back to where your question started, we are funding for the first time to a level that is actually commensurate with reality.

If we are to properly resource what is in front of us, it gives us a better opportunity to address that complexity of challenging issues that we know lead to children coming into the purview of the child protection system. If we can realistically fund, I think we are more enabled to deeply address those interconnected and complex issues, particularly given we are also, through this budget, funding other programs that will help in those efforts to support and empower children and young people who are at risk.

Mr TEAGUE: I think I understand the minister's response to be consistent with an aim or an aspiration to reduce the number of children in care. Still on page 16 of Budget Paper 5—and I will give the minister an opportunity to reflect—how is that consistent with the statement that is provided to explain the provision of those funds over the course of the forward estimates? I quote from the first paragraph:

The initiative—

and that is the additional resources initiative over the course of the forward estimates—

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Can you tell me where you are?

Mr TEAGUE: I am at page 16, at about point 7 on the page. How is that in any way consistent—and it need not be, but I would invite the minister to reflect on it—in either absolute terms or percentage terms, with the explanation for the initiative that is set out there in the first paragraph under the table, which indicates that the initiative is providing for funds, and I quote:

…reflecting more children and young people in non-family based care in 2021-22 and 2022-23—

and here is the key part—

and expected higher growth of children and young people in care over the forward estimates.

What is underpinning that anticipated higher growth of children and young people in care over the forward estimates? I presume that is not an aspiration.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: The first thing I would say, and I am sorry if I have not been clear, is that whilst the number of children in care continues to grow the numbers are actually slowing and, yes, we need to respond.

Mr TEAGUE: The rate of growth is slowing.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: Yes, I hear that.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: In terms of the aspiration, of course we want to continue to slow growth and reduce numbers.

Mr TEAGUE: What does 'higher growth' mean in that context?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: To answer your question, you will see there that the paragraph particularly points to 'non-family based care'. One of the things we will continue to do is to focus on how we grow family-based care. That means how we can better attract and retain foster and kinship carers.

One thing that has been particularly difficult over the past couple of years in that regard—and I am speaking about a time when I was not the minister—it is my understanding from the department and from various statements made by the previous minister that during the last couple of years of the pandemic there were particular issues around attracting and retaining foster and kinship carers, as you can imagine, in periods of lockdown in particular households, etc.

It was harder for—sorry, I did not know somebody else was asking me a question. COVID certainly had an impact in addressing the issue that is there in that first paragraph that you have pointed to in terms of non-family based care. That certainly had an impact, but what I would say is that we are absolutely aspirational and positive about our desire to attract more foster and kinship carers, and I must say in that regard that there are a number of issues that have to be addressed.

As the shadow minister, and since becoming the minister, I have heard many stories from foster and kinship carers about the difficulties they have faced in all sorts of aspects of providing care. I think you, the shadow minister, would be aware that, during the course of debating the amendment bill to the Children and Young People (Safety) Act that the previous minister brought to parliament, there were multiple debates and multiple discussions around those parliamentary debates about the need to have inserted into the act procedural fairness for carers.

That is something that many carers felt was needed to improve their care experience. I heard that directly from carers and particular advocacy bodies, and I think in terms of addressing that issue about family-based care, which we do want more of, we need to respond to those issues. Unfortunately, the previous minister refused to support those amendments for procedural fairness. The bill then passed the House of Assembly and sat in the Legislative Council for a very long time unattended to.

A number of carers advocated, out of deep frustration, for a foster carer inquiry to address a number of the issues that were brought up repeatedly to the previous minister. That inquiry has now concluded in terms of submissions, etc. There will be a report from that inquiry in the coming weeks, and I think that will present an opportunity to examine any recommendations in terms of what could be and respond to them in a way that improves the experience of foster and kinship carers.

What I would also say though in relation to that inquiry is that, on coming into government, it is an independent inquiry so there was not anything that could be particularly changed about that inquiry, but it is clear that it had been quite under-resourced. To make sure that foster carers are heard, as well as that inquiry, I am absolutely organising a comprehensive range of forums in different locations with foster and kinship carers to make sure that their voices are heard.

I have already convened a forum of kinship carers and then of foster carers in Mount Gambier. I am in the process of planning other forums, and I will continue to have those forums. The reason I mention that is that if we are to increase the number of people who are prepared to act as foster and kinship carers, and if we are to improve the experience of foster and kinship carers so that they can be retained, it is incredibly important that their voices are heard.

As I said, the paragraph that you point to refers to non-family based care. One of the ways that we want to, I guess, address that particular point is by working—and I have just outlined the ways that we will—to improve the rate of children and young people being cared for in family-based care.

Mr TEAGUE: In some respects, I am not sure what question the minister was answering.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I am not sure I had the question right, sorry.

Mr TEAGUE: I might just go to the particular words, and I will perhaps reflect on the kinship and foster carer aspect coming out of it. Again, staying with that paragraph, the way I read the paragraph, and in any event, it seems to reflect on two aspects. First of all, you have a reflection of 'more children and young people in non-family based care in 2021-22 in 2022-23'.

There might or might not be a comma inserted there if you want to be 100 per cent clear, but the way I read that is the paragraph is expecting higher growth of children and young people in care over the forward estimates. Are there any grounds upon which that expectation is founded, and to what extent is there any sign of success in that not coming to fruition? Do you follow?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I think so. Just two things: Cathy Taylor is going to speak to those figures in a moment about the percentages across the out years or the forward years, but one thing I would reflect on is that you rightly point out that, I think in the second to last line of the paragraph you are speaking about, it says 'and expected higher growth of children and young people in care over the forward estimates'.

I think a better way to express that would be 'an expected growth of children and young people in care over the forward estimates' because, as I said before, whilst in all of the projections that you can take over whatever number of years you want to there has been growth, the rate of growth, however, is slowing. I will ask Cathy to provide some further information that might be helpful in terms of the way that the funding is structured to illustrate, I guess, the aspiration that we have that you have spoken about.

Ms TAYLOR: I thank the member for the question. In particular, as the minister said, there are two things that are influencing those figures: the first one is obviously the mix of family-based versus non-family based; the second one is the reference to—and I will use the language that is in the paragraph—the 'expected higher growth of children and young people in care over the forward estimates'. It really should read 'than previously budgeted for'. The former government budgeted in 2022-23 for growth of 2 per cent and in 2023-24 1 per cent, and the government has now revised the funding volumes to reflect a growth in 2022-23 4 per cent and in 2023-24 3 per cent.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: And then 1 and 1, so in the out years 1 per cent and 1 per cent to reflect the aspiration. Does that make sense?

Mr TEAGUE: I suppose, while we are looking at what is expressed there in the budget papers, that is good to have on the record. We see, therefore, that there is an expected higher growth of children and young people in care over the forward estimates, but there is an aspiration to reduce the level of growth—

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: The rate.

Mr TEAGUE: Yes, the rate, the level, the extent of that growth, as the forward estimate years continue. So there is an inbuilt aspiration to decrease the rate of growth of children in care. Do we have that expressed as a number for convenience? It is a matter of maths, I suppose.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I think we just said it. I am not sure what else to—

Mr TEAGUE: You have given it in percentage terms.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: You might take on notice how that translates, in terms of absolute numbers of children in care, over the forward estimates.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I am not sure if we need to take it on notice when we can express it in figures.

Mr TEAGUE: If you can indicate that now it would be helpful.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: As I said, there are a number of issues that impact the rate of growth that we can strive towards but which we cannot necessarily predict. Again, I take you back to my earlier comments that the rate of out-of-home care placement growth depends on a number of factors, and one of those is—

Mr TEAGUE: Yes. I do not mean to cut you off—

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: —the rate of reunification—

Mr TEAGUE: Yes, we can all do the maths.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: —which I would always hope we can improve in terms of safely reunifying families. We cannot always predict the age of children that come into care. Of course, you may have a particular cohort where more children reach a particular age when they leave care than in other years—

Mr TEAGUE: Yes, but nonetheless you can indicate a percentage growth that is built into the numbers. You have just advised it.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: I am just asking how that translates in terms of absolute numbers, that is all. It is not all that complicated.

Mr BROWN: Well, then you can work it out yourself.

Mr TEAGUE: I could; I am just in the midst of asking questions, that is all. That is why I offered the minister the opportunity to take it on notice. You do not need to take time out to do it right now. Perhaps a thing that might be interesting to have on the record is the baseline upon which that growth is proceeding from.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Pardon?

Mr TEAGUE: The chief executive just indicated the percentage growth rates. That is all clear, that sounds—

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes, which are going downward. As I said, we are predicting a slowed rate of growth, which, in terms of your broader question about the context and aspiration, I would say is a very positive expression of what we want to do. I would just bring you back to—

Mr TEAGUE: I am not putting you on the mat, in that sense. It is simply a question in relation to the baseline.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: The other thing I would say again, just to remind you, is that this is in sharp contrast to the previous government, which utterly failed to budget in any realistic way or in any aspirational way. Not only that, the previous government also imposed a $4.5 million per annum efficiency measure on the Department for Child Protection at a time when growth was skyrocketing and at a time when a number of issues were being raised by the previous minister. There seemed to be no thought or connection either to the reality of the situation or to any aspirational target.

Again, I would say to you that, as well as providing the additional funds and structuring them in a way that expresses the aspiration that we have spoken about, we have also invested in a range of other programs to support children and young people to provide greater oversight for children in care, which is a really important point, in amongst the $7.5 million of funding—

Mr TEAGUE: I will raise a point of order. I hesitate to interrupt you, minister. I really stress that I am not endeavouring to put you on the mat or to score points at all. I am looking to identify, by reference to the budget, the baseline measures and the extent of growth.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I understand.

Mr TEAGUE: It has been provided in percentage terms. All I have asked for is the baseline. I do not need you to take time out to do that right now, but it might be that your chief executive has done so in the course of that monologue. I am just seeking the number, nothing more and nothing less.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: As I have said—

The CHAIR: Would it be preferable to take it on notice to provide those figures?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: No, because, as I have said, I have already answered it. I am really trying to explain, and please tell me if I need to give further information about the explanation.

Mr TEAGUE: Perhaps conveniently—

The CHAIR: Can we just let the minister finish those comments, and then we will get back to you.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: We have been very clear with the percentages, very open and very clear, rightly so. I think there is a shared understanding of the aspiration there to reduce the number of children in non-family based care, as we have spoken about. As I said, there is complexity around that growth. It means that we cannot predict how many children—hopefully, it will be a high number—will be reunified with families.

We cannot predict how many children may go into family-based care. We hope that more children and young people are in family-based care. We cannot predict the age of the population in care. We cannot predict exactly which interactions in terms of other services might provide other avenues for children and young people in care. That is my answer. I have given my answer. I am not sure what else to provide. I feel like I have given it at length, so I am not sure what else to provide.

Mr TEAGUE: You have, but you are not answering the question. The minister indicated earlier that there had been a growth in 2020-21 to the following year from 4,496 to 4,710. Perhaps if I put it this way, what is the baseline number to which those percentages are applied? It is not a trick question. It is simply a matter of being on all fours in relation to that broader set of statements and aspirations the minister has referred to. It is no more or less complicated than that.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I have provided those current figures, as you just spoke about. I have been really clear about what the projections are in percentage terms, but I would say again that placement growth is impacted by a huge range of complex factors. I would also say again that we will be looking to ensure that we closely look at how we can shift the numbers around out-of-home care placements to family-based placements.

Again, there are current difficulties in that regard. As I said, over the last couple of years there have been particular difficulties around COVID. Also, as I am sure you would be aware from your meeting with Connecting Kinship and Foster Carers, and I am sure the member for Frome would also be aware from her time working with the former Minister for Child Protection, there are issues that carers are experiencing that we need to address. All those factors will impact on this particular issue.

Mr TEAGUE: We will perhaps move along. In terms of the results of the additional funding over the forward estimates, we are still at the first line of the table at page 16, and we see at the second line a growth in the number of full-time equivalents from 18 to 36 in 2022-23—that is the subject of the budget—and estimates of a relatively significant increase in 2023-24 to 62 FTEs and then maintaining that up to 64 FTEs in 2025-26. How are those resources to be deployed and what is the cost of those FTE increases, more specifically?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I might just make a couple of broader comments about the child protection workforce before I get to cost, etc., of FTEs and how those particular workers will be, I think deployed was the word that you used. In commencing those comments, I firstly want to acknowledge and wholeheartedly thank the incredibly tireless workers of the Department for Child Protection, who every single day attempt to respond with such compassion and diligence to the needs of our community as they go about discharging their statutory obligations in the system.

I have had the opportunity to visit many DCP sites, and I have already spoken with hundreds of workers, and the thing that strikes me about all those conversations is that every worker who makes the decision to work in the child protection system starts that work with a desire to make a difference in the lives of vulnerable children and young people. That is why they commenced working in that system.

The work is really hard. I have taken, as I said, the opportunity to meet with hundreds of workers in the Department for Child Protection and in the course of those visits, and also in the course of meeting with union workplace delegates who work in the child protection system, I have asked all of those workers what they love about their work, what has been difficult and what are some of the changes that could be made.

Certainly, one of the common themes amongst a number of themes is that they need more workers to work alongside them so that they have the time, the energy and the resource to work deeply with families and children, to provide the time and support and the care so that children and young people in the particular circumstances they are in when they enter care can have the attention that they need and they deserve.

I guess the shorter answer to your question is that we want more workers to be working with these children and young people. As I said earlier in my opening statement, we know that it requires a whole-of-community effort, a whole-of-government effort to support the difficult work that those workers do if we are to make a real difference in terms of improving outcomes for children and young people, in terms of enabling children and young people to emotionally and mentally thrive.

We are making an investment in building and supporting the child protection workforce. One of the things that we will be doing is developing a comprehensive workforce plan so that we can develop a workforce that is sustainable for the future. We will be working on that plan in consultation with workers and with their unions and with the community organisations in the sector, because we want to ensure that there are sustainable and safe staffing levels for the future.

One of the other things that we are considering is how we can better attract workers to the child protection workforce. We want to campaign to make sure that students and other jobseekers see child protection as a place in which they want to work. Again, the short answer is that we want more workers to be doing the work that is required and to be doing it in a way that provides the best possible support and care for children and young people and the families with whom they interact.

I have made a commitment as a minister to speak at length and to listen deeply to everybody who connects with child protection. Of course, one of those groups is the workers themselves, so we will certainly be making sure that, as we develop that workforce plan for the future and respond to the needs of children and young people, their families and what workers also identify themselves, we have a workforce plan that reflects exactly what is required to ensure the best possible outcomes. As I said, there will be more workers, and we are also developing a workforce plan, and I will certainly be happy to keep the house abreast of developments as we consult and bring together that workforce plan.

Mr TEAGUE: And the cost of those FTEs?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Sorry?

Mr TEAGUE: That was the second part of the question.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: We are just getting an exact figure for you.

Mr TEAGUE: It is really to identify the proportion of the costs over the forward estimates that have been increased and how much of that relates to those FTE increases.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: To the workforce, yes.

Ms TAYLOR: I thank the member for the question. Over the forward estimates the costs of the FTE—and we are talking only about the Department for Child Protection in that case—are approximately $25.1 million. The other costs that contribute to the operating expenses that are referred to include, obviously, the NGO contracts, as the minister said, and we also have workers in NGOs. It also covers carer payments, incidentals and accommodation, so it is made up of probably five factors, including the FTE within the department.

Mr TEAGUE: I might leave it on that note and move on.

The CHAIR: I will let you do the next question and then, member for King, do you have a question? Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: I am sorry but I am not sure if I heard the minister earlier. Certainly, it was the case in the other estimates that the Premier remarked as recently as last July, and somewhat unkindly in relation to the taking of questions from government members, but if that is the plan I will yield.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: If you would like to contrast—and I am looking at the member for Frome because I know that she is well aware of how the previous estimates session with the previous minister unfurled—I think you will find that there will be a very small number. The previous minister had several, multiple, government questions so perhaps you might like to leave any compare and contrast on that particular front.

Mr TEAGUE: Having adverted to it, the Premier was really quite clear. He indicated that it simply happens as cover, so I was not going to put that on the record in particular, but I will keep it quick and see how much ground we can cover.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I think you can also see from my fulsome answers to questions that I am very happy to answer your questions and I will be happy to continue to answer your questions.

Mr TEAGUE: The record speaks for itself in that regard. You have already addressed the question in relation to funding the growth of numbers of children in care. It appears it would be remiss of me not to go to what is described at pages 92 and 93 of Volume 1 as the kind of elephant in the room in regard to growth. I would like to go to foster and kinship care in a moment back at page 16, but for the moment at page 92, about point 7 on the page, the first dot point under explanation of significant movements, and then subsequent—

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Sorry, can you just say the dot point again? I missed it.

Mr TEAGUE: The first one—

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: —and again, the first point on the next page, page 93. Both refer to the estimated number of children and young people in care and the cost of providing services during what I have described as the elephant in the room: COVID-19. They are very significant numbers in the context of the numbers we have been talking about in terms of forward estimates. There has been an escalation of children in care, and provision of services consequentially, over that period. Is there not, surely, a correlating anticipated decrease, or is there some alternative explanation for the continued growth?

Again, there is no endeavour to provide any sort of trick question. It is just a straightforward analysis of where we have been over the last couple of years in COVID, the dramatic amount of resource associated with it, and then the context of growth that is described at page 16 in Budget Paper 5 and as you have elucidated over the course of the last hour or so. I might add the first dot point under the second paragraph as well on page 92.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: An increase in the base and respite payments? Is that what you mean?

Mr TEAGUE: The increase in the estimated number of children and young people in care and the costs associated with providing care services during COVID-19 in the amount of $42 million. So there are three references, if you like, all I think in relation to the same topic.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes. There are probably a few things to note to bring that figure to life. In terms of the impact of COVID on the care of children, what we saw over the past couple of years during the former government's tenure was that through COVID the casemix changed. I think I spoke earlier about how difficult it was for some foster and kinship families to continue to or to begin to care for children and young people in their homes as a result of COVID. That certainly changed the casemix. Also, of course, it impacted the Department for Child Protection workforce in terms of people being absent from work and arrangements that needed to be made in that regard.

The CHAIR: We can return to that if you like because I am going to go over to the member for King now.

Mrs PEARCE: My question relates to Budget Paper 4, Agency Statements, Volume 1, page 91, 2022-23 targets and Budget Paper 5, Budget Measures Statement, page 17. Can you tell us more about the plans for establishing the Child and Young Person's Visitor Scheme in residential care?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I thank the member for King for her question. I was not sure if there would be an opportunity before the conclusion of Ms Wright's term to do so, but I wanted to offer my sincere thanks to Ms Penny Wright for her five years of service in her role as Guardian for Children and Young People.

I thank her for her incredibly hard work in this role and also for the way in which she has gone about undertaking that role. Her deep thought and care for vulnerable children and young people in care, and her commitment to ensuring that they are heard and that their needs are acted upon, is absolutely exemplary. Ms Wright will conclude her term on 9 July, and I wish her all the very best in her future endeavours.

We are in the process of appointing a new guardian, and I look forward to updating the parliament and the community on this in due course. I, too, take very seriously my responsibilities in ensuring the rights and safety of children and young people in care are at the heart of the care and services made available to them. The input of the guardian is key to this, as is the principle of an independent visitor scheme that provides an additional layer of insight into the experiences of young people in residential care.

It is important to note that, prior to Ms Wright's appointment to the legislated role of visitor, the former Labor government had funded the guardian's office for a two-year trial of a child and young person's visitor program. That pilot concluded in September 2019. In the trial program's final report in February 2020, the guardian sought further funding for the program to continue. Unfortunately, however, this request was not met by the previous government and resulted in the program ceasing. The program was a recommendation of the Nyland review, and the former government shamefully failed to resource the program adequately despite frequent representation about the importance of the program.

I am very pleased that this government has committed funding to ensure this important function can be performed in the future. In this budget, we have allocated $450,000 per annum, indexed to reintroduce the Child and Young Person's Visitor scheme in residential care. My department and I are absolutely committed to placing children and young people at the heart of the child protection system, particularly for any decisions that affect the young children for whom we care or who are vulnerable. It is crucial that we listen to children in care, and I have already taken steps to do so.

We are also committing additional funding to improve advocacy and support for children and young people in care and leaving care, including providing $800,000 to the CREATE Foundation to support transition from care, working with the Commissioner for Aboriginal Children and Young People to create additional mechanisms for young Aboriginal people to have a voice, and providing opportunities for young people in care or with a care experience to have voice through the No Capes for Change committee.

We are listening, and we will continue to listen to these young people who represent themselves and others with pride and distinction. We will not only take their advice but also continue to build on existing mechanisms through which children and young people are given a voice in child protection, including through participation in case plan meetings, care decisions and annual review processes. In addition to my work with the Guardian for Children and Young People, I also work closely with other fine advocates, such as the two children's commissioners, who put forward so well the views of young people in care.

Mr TEAGUE: With reference to the Nyland recommendations in terms of the FTE increases, what is the ratio now and what is the ratio as a result of the increases? Is that getting close to or complying with recommendation 150 of those Nyland recommendations of two staff?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes. I think I answered this question to some degree in an earlier response. What I would say is that the complex nature of child protection work means that we face a number of challenges in terms of workforce development, and that is certainly true for the child protection sector nationally, and as such it is recognised in the National Framework for Protecting Australia's Children 2021-2031 as an issue to be addressed. Through that framework, as are other states, a series of responses to those issues around workforce will be progressed.

Complementing that national approach, DCP convenes regular heads of industry forums, and other sector-wide workshops, the most recent of which was on 25 May 2022, which I attended, and one of the functions of that particular group is to discuss workforce challenges. As I spoke about before, that collaborative process will absolutely assist us to develop a holistic child protection workforce strategy to build a sustainable workforce for the future, and it practically demonstrates our commitment to delivering the best possible outcomes for children and young people in care.

The significant investment that we are making into the child protection workforce, the work that we will do with the sector, and also with workers and their unions, and also the work that we will do as part of the effort to progress the National Framework for Protecting Australia's Children—the 10-year strategy—will certainly assist us in developing that workforce plan.

One of the strategies that we will make sure that we do focus on in progressing that workforce plan is improving the staffing ratios in residential care, and as part of exploring that issue we will examine the workforce requirements for care shifts to ensure that they are tailored to the needs of particular children and young people, and the safety of staff.

Mr TEAGUE: I am not sure what question the minister was answering. I will perhaps move on. How many reports has the department received of children in care being out unsupervised, uncared for and unsafe at night?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Sorry, what—

The CHAIR: Would you be able to repeat the question? I didn't hear it as well.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: What budget line? Sorry, just which particular budget line are you referring to with that question?

Mr TEAGUE: Really and truly?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes, I just want to check because there is—

Mr TEAGUE: Alright, let us call it page 91, Program 1: Care and Protection. I am not sure the minister did not hear me, but for the benefit of—

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I could not actually quite hear you, sorry.

Mr TEAGUE: —the Chair and the committee I am sorry if I was not—I will perhaps repeat the question: how many reports has the department received of children in care being out unsupervised, uncared for and unsafe at night?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: That is in relation to 91, did you say?

Mr TEAGUE: Yes, in relation to the program 1 description/objective.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I am not sure what dot point you are referring to, but I think I understand the question. I am unclear as to which reference you are making, but I will answer the question. Sorry, I am just trying to find my figures. It is the missing person reports. Is that what you are trying to get to?

Mr TEAGUE: Yes. I note that the minister is taking some considerable amount of time. I do not mean to pin the minister down on it but, just for the purpose of context, as recently as July the Premier has indicated, and to paraphrase, 'Either the minister does not know the children are out, in which case we obviously have a monumental scandal, or the minister does know if children are out unsafe at night, in which case we would invite her to answer the question.' I would echo and repeat those sentiments.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I am attempting to find my piece of paper, but I will answer without it because I cannot actually locate it. The thing that I would speak about is that there is an incredibly complex array of issues that children and young people who are in care experience. There are often trauma-related behaviours and dysregulated behaviours that children and young people in care exhibit because of the various issues they contemplate.

One of the questions that I know I explored with the previous minister—in fact, I think you might have just asked a similar question to what I asked—is that one of the things that has been contemplated, and it responds to a recommendation of the Nyland royal commission, is that a model of secure therapeutic care be implemented so that a child who is in care could access particular supports that they need to stay safe.

A lot of consultation was undertaken on the model of secure care, and that consultation sought the views of a range of recognised experts to help guide decision-making around secure care. That review was finalised in August 2020, when of course there was another minister undertaking this role. What we understand from the time of the previous government is that the overwhelming majority of stakeholders were not sure about the particular model.

What nearly all of the respondents recommended was that the government actually invest in a therapeutic model of care to be embedded across the system. I understand the previous minister accepted that feedback and, based on the review of the available evidence at that time when that consultation was undertaken, DCP determined that it would prioritise investment in the implementation of an evidence-based therapeutic residential care model to support quality care outcomes for all children and young people in care.

One of the things that the previous minister spoke about a lot—and I was very interested in the model that she spoke about—was the sanctuary model of therapeutic care. I am sure you would have heard the previous minister speak about that also. I understand that that model has now been rolled out across DCP residential care. DCP staff are trained in that model to encourage children and young people to have a voice and be fully engaged in the day-to-day decisions about their lives.

My understanding is that sanctuary builds on the existing trauma-informed skills of DCP residential care staff and ensures that DCP's approach to caring for children and young people is both trauma responsive and therapeutic. The implementation of the sanctuary—

Mr TEAGUE: Point of order, Mr Chair: I hesitate to raise a point of order, but I do. There are five minutes remaining. The minister is continuing to be non-responsive to questions, and there is at least one more topic that I would like to move to.

The CHAIR: The minister is providing a bit of context, but the basic question was whether you have the crude numbers when it comes to those kids.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I do.

Mr BROWN: On a point of order, Chair: I can appreciate the sense of frustration that the member for Heysen has about the way things are going for him, but to disrupt the minister while I am trying to listen to her answer is something I find very disruptive for this committee. I would ask you to pull him up and make sure that he sits quietly and listens to the minister's answer.

The CHAIR: I did indicate that the minister was providing some context, but I am also clarifying that the original question was about numbers, so it would be good to get to the numbers, in one way or another.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: There are a couple of things I would say. I keep abreast of those numbers, of course I do, on a regular basis. What I will continue to consider is the efficacy of the sanctuary model. I know that the previous minister was very supportive of it, and I am very interested in understanding the efficacy of that model. What I am also very interested in is exploring whether there are any other mechanisms that may be needed in terms of any secure care options, policies, procedures, etc. That is an area that I am actively considering.

I do have an intention also to speak with the Western Australian government in a few weeks' time, because they also have contemplated this issue and have come up with particular models, processes and procedures around secure care to address the numbers of children who engage in trauma-related and risk-taking behaviours, including those that are—I think you used the words 'late at night'.

I will certainly continue to monitor how the sanctuary model of therapeutic care responds to that. I will also consider widely—as I said, I do have conversations, I think they are already locked in with the Western Australian government—the advances they have made in responding to this particular issue.

Offline, I am very happy to provide information about the sanctuary model. I suspect, given it was implemented under the previous government, that there is probably information around it that you can access. Any other ideas or innovative systems that I come across, including in the engagement with Western Australia, in terms of secure care and therapeutic care, I will be very happy to share, offline, with you.

Mr TEAGUE: In the context of page 89, reunification, I refer to point 5:

Working with families to address the safety concerns that led to a child or young person entering care, so reunification can take place when it is safe and in the best interests of the child or young person.

I have two questions. Firstly, what are the current rates of reunification? Secondly, if the focus is on reunification, what funding is being invested in education support services to parents to enable reunification?

As a related aspect of that, how many children and young people are self-placing annually, and what programs are in place, perhaps as part of that additional funding, to prevent self-placing? You might address the supports that are available to teachers in that respect, in particular, given that they are at the forefront of the problem.

The CHAIR: Can we have a concise answer? We are about to run out of the allotted time.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Reunification services are a really critical element of the child protection system. As I spoke about before, we are constantly contemplating that tension between the desire to intervene early when families are struggling and to keep families together and the need to remove children and young people when they are not safe. Reunification services are critical. They sit alongside other services like family group conferencing and intensive family support services, which also fall under my statutory responsibilities.

Obviously, one of the first priorities for DCP for the provision of a child's or young person's long-term care is the consideration of their birth family. If a child or young person enters care, to ensure their safety DCP will assess where their needs for safety, wellbeing and permanency of care will best be met, through reunification with family or through a long-term placement in care. When DCP makes an initial assessment that safe reunification is possible, the DCP case plan will set out the areas of parental change and learning required for unification to proceed. That might include addressing issues like substance misuse or factors involving violence in the home, etc.

As part of that process, DCP will refer parents to relevant services to support them and to give them the best opportunity to make any necessary changes. We are really committed to that safe and planned approach to family reunification. In order to achieve that safe, planned family reunification where it has been identified that it is possible, the department undertakes not just that initial assessment but ongoing assessments of the safety and risks associated with the child or young person returning home, taking into account any progress against the behavioural changes or learnings that may have been set down in that case plan.

The CHAIR: Thank you, minister. The allotted time is up, so I declare the examination of the portfolio of the Department for Child Protection and the estimate of payments for the Department for Child Protection completed. I thank everybody for their contribution once again, especially the public servants for all the effort that goes into preparing for these committee meetings.

Sitting suspended from 12:47 to 13:45.