Bills

Children and Young People (Safety) Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Adelaide is on her feet as the lead speaker continuing her remarks, plural.

Ms SANDERSON (Adelaide) (15:57): Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. I will just wrap it all up now and give other people an opportunity to speak on this very important bill.

It is clear from stakeholders that there is an imperative need for a fundamental shift from this government away from the existing crisis-driven responses. Yes, we need to have a system in place for children who have already experienced abuse or neglect, but we must also create a focus on early intervention and the health and wellbeing of families so that children are not entering the child protection system.

It is clear from the responses of stakeholders to the bill that there are stakeholders, such as carers and grandparents, who felt ignored and disregarded by this government and who have had very serious concerns that appear not to have been addressed in this legislation. The child protection system in South Australia could not function without carers and grandparents, and it is about time their concerns were addressed.

I am deeply disappointed about how the government has gone about presenting this final bill to parliament. As parliamentarians, it is our job to represent our electorates and the people of South Australia in this chamber. It is completely unrealistic to believe that members of parliament can speak on a bill the same day to which it was presented to parliament with no prior briefing on the final bill or consultation.

Yes, a draft bill was out for consultation, but we all are aware of the drastic changes that often occur between a draft and a final bill. This is disrespectful to the stakeholders, who deserve the opportunity to comment on the final bill before it is tabled in parliament, and it is also disrespectful to the children of South Australia who deserve a bipartisan bill of an incredibly high standard.

Ms COOK (Fisher) (15:59): I rise today to support the passage of the Children and Young People (Safety) Bill 2017, which is but one of the legislative components of the government's response to the Nyland royal commission. Rather than amending the existing Children's Protection Act 1993, the government considered that a new legislative scheme was more suitable to implement those Child Protection Systems Royal Commission report recommendations requiring legislative reform. The further positive to this approach was that it provided an opportunity to revise and refine all of the existing provisions in the Children's Protection Act 1993 that were not the subject of the royal commission recommendations.

During the drafting process, input was also received from Department for Child Protection practitioners, who provided invaluable on-the-ground feedback. I note that a draft bill was publicly released on 29 November 2016. The government has consulted extensively. Formal consultation closed on 27 January 2017. I understand that a significant volume of feedback was received which commented not only on the measures in the bill but also reflected on the policy approach taken with regard to various provisions. All responses were collated and carefully considered. A number of these have today been read to you by the member for Adelaide, and it appears that she has not really had any prior consideration of these.

The member for Adelaide has suggested that a table identifying changes made in the current act and those clauses adopting Nyland recommendations would have been useful for her to consider, but I would have thought that, as shadow minister for child protection, the member for Adelaide would be able to recognise those changes without the provision of this said table. However, it may be useful to provide a summary of some of the changes made to the draft bill tabled in parliament.

Reinstatement of the child safety recommendations into the bill with new provisions that are updated to reflect modern practice and community expectations, such as requirement at clause 105 of the bill for policies and procedures to be reviewed every five years, forms part of these changes. Whilst it was always the intention to provide provisions for child safe environments, once consultation with the Department for Education and Child Development had been completed, the feedback received was overwhelming in its support for the continuation of these measures in this bill. It also deleted all references in the bill to prescribed fees and expanded the application of case planning to apply to all children and young people who come into contact with the Department for Child Protection, not just those under the custody or guardianship of the chief executive.

The amendment to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle to require the chief executive or the court, as the case requires, where reasonably practicable to consult with and have regard to any submissions of a recognised Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander organisation. The bill further defines 'recognised Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander organisation' to mean one, which after consultation with the Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander community, is declared by notice in the Gazette as being recognised for the purposes of this section.

We have seen an amendment to clause 28 (now renumbered in the settled bill to clause 29) to add a further measure which requires a state authority who has received a referred matter from the Chief Executive of the Department for Child Protection to deal with the matter in a timely manner, having regard to the need to ensure that children and young people are protected.

Another change is prescribing the jurisdiction to be conferred upon SACAT in the bill, clarifying that an internal review must first be completed identifying who is eligible to apply to SACAT. We have also seen a simplifying in the placement principles so that they are easier to understand and apply in practice by those persons or bodies who are engaged in the administration, operation or enforcement of the legislation.

I speak to this bill as a parliamentarian and also as a parent. I myself have been through a terrible experience as a mother having lost my child, and his life was lost as a consequence of the actions of a person who had so little respect for themselves that they had no respect for the life of others, so I have a vested interest in ensuring that these young vulnerable people in our community are looked after.

I speak as a mother who went out to look for answers as to why this might happen in our community. What I found was that worldwide—this is not isolated to Adelaide—young people who do not have the benefit of growing up in the family home, those who grow up in care, are the most likely to offend in our community, the most likely to become recidivist offenders, and also unfortunately the most likely to become victims. This group of vulnerable children has the most complex and heartbreaking of challenges. That is why commentary and opinion related to this group should be offered with great care and also based on evidence.

I now turn my comments to those made by the member for Adelaide. Commentary was made regarding the vesting of guardianship functions in the chief executive. I do not accept that children will be unnecessarily hurt by the government's policy to remove this function from the minister. There will continue to be a responsible minister and they will continue to be a presence in the lives of the children in the care of the chief executive, at least under this government.

I trust the incredible people working in this sector to provide many opportunities for young people in our care, opportunities that will ensure many highlights for our most vulnerable children. To be honest, it is actually a pretty ridiculous notion to oppose the separation of the role of the guardian from the minister based on it risking the removal of a highlight in a child's life.

I am confident that this bill is a vast improvement on the current legislative regime and, while commending its swift passage to the house, I would like to comment as well that improving measures to protect South Australia's children and young people, particularly our most vulnerable children and young people, is a priority not just for our government but for all the community. This bill is an important step in this process. The children and young people who will be most impacted by the passing of this bill rely on us, as a government and members of parliament, to make the best possible decisions for them, as often their circumstances predicate their not having a strong family or community base to make the right decisions for them.

Whilst this often requires a statutory intervention, which this bill now underpins, this should not predetermine a child's fate that assumes that they have less potential or less worth than others. South Australia's children and young people—all of them—are our future. They are our future teachers, doctors, professors, engineers, scientists and politicians. With my full support, I commend this bill to the house for the benefit of our young children and our young people who will be the deserved recipients of the policy and practice changes that will inevitably flow from its passing.

Ms WORTLEY (Torrens) (16:07): I am pleased to rise to speak to the bill today. The bill is the largest piece in a suite of legislative reforms that form part of the response to the Child Protection Systems Royal Commission.

Following the government's release of its response to the royal commission and the Children and Young People (Safety) Bill 2016 for public consultation, submissions and comments have been received from members of the public, government and non-government agencies. Listening to the feedback was important, and the government has made a number of changes. These included the reinstatement of the provisions regarding child safe environments. The government has committed a significant increase in funding to early intervention and prevention. It announced the investment of more than $430 million to deliver a new child protection system in our state.

The Children and Young People (Safety) Bill 2016 promotes permanence and stability for children and young people who have been removed from their parents or guardians. It encourages decisions and actions to be made in a timely manner and, in the case of young children, as early as possible. It also contains a number of provisions designed to ensure that the child's voice is heard. Under the bill, children and young people must participate in decision-making and must have a reasonable opportunity to put their views to the court.

The interests of the child will always come first under the bill. Where there are competing interests, the child's safety will prevail. Where a parent, guardian or other person has an interest, it will be placed behind that of the child. I also note that the bill allows carers to be more involved in decision-making, and this is significant. It is very important. Carers will be able to participate in any decision-making process that relates to the health, safety, wellbeing and welfare of a child or young person in their care. I know that this has been an issue of great interest and passion for carers for some time, and I am pleased to see the government act to address these concerns.

This bill will provide a framework for a new approach to child protection in South Australia. The government has sought to enshrine in legislation key principles to guide the administration of child protection by experts within the system. The bill makes it clear that the safety of children is paramount in its administration and enforcement. The involvement of children and young people in the decision-making process and the increased rights and recognition of carers lays the foundation for alternative intervention avenues, including child and family assessment and referral networks and family group conferences. These are all positive steps. I commend the bill.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.R. Kenyon.