<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2014-05-08" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Third Parliament, First Session (53-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>53</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="117" />
  <endPage num="195" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Child Protection</name>
      <text id="20140508435bab5fae23482b90000719">
        <heading>Child Protection</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="1804" kind="question">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Bragg</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Deputy Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-05-08">
            <name>Child Protection</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-05-08T14:39:05" />
        <text id="20140508435bab5fae23482b90000720">
          <timeStamp time="2014-05-08T14:39:05" />
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:39):</by>  A supplementary, if I may, sir. Now that the sad event has occurred, that the child has died, and some months have passed and you are now aware that there had been multiple notifications about this child generally, albeit before 11 November on the information you have been provided, are you saying that, therefore, you haven't requested any change of the management of these notifications in your department since that disclosure and, indeed, the death of a child?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="614" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.M. RANKINE</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Wright</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Education and Child Development</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-05-08">
            <name>Child Protection</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-05-08T14:39:40" />
        <text id="20140508435bab5fae23482b90000721">
          <timeStamp time="2014-05-08T14:39:40" />
          <by role="member" id="614">The Hon. J.M. RANKINE (Wright—Minister for Education and Child Development) (14:39):</by>  I am advised that all notifications were appropriately assessed and rated. This family had the support of the Safe Babies Program for some considerable time. Respite was being provided, and there was support being provided by a non-government organisation. I understand those involved with the family were reporting that the family was, in fact, doing well, and there was, at that point, no requirement that there be a statutory response to that family.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>