CHILD HARBOURING

The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON (14:44): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a question of the minister representing the Minister for Education and Child Development.

Leave granted.

The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON: I thought I would use this opportunity today to highlight my concerns again about the misuse by Families SA of the two relatively new offences of harbouring a child in state care. As members may recall, in response to findings of the Mullighan inquiry in 2009, this parliament passed the Statutes Amendment (Children's Protection) Bill, which introduced an offence for failing to comply with a direction not to harbour, conceal or communicate with a child under section 52AAB of the Children's Protection Act 1993, and harbouring or concealing a child under section 52AAC. Referring to section 52AAB, the minister stated when introducing the bill:

These directions are aimed to protect vulnerable children who are in state care from the kinds of exploitation referred to by Commissioner Mullighan in his report.

At the time I expressed my fears that, despite this intent, Families SA would use these powers as a case-management tool and apply them to family members of a child in state care. Unfortunately, yet again, I have been proven right.

In May I brought to this parliament's attention the ongoing prosecution of a young woman and her sister—both of whom were under the guardianship of the minister until the age of 18—for failing to comply with a direction not to harbour, conceal or communicate with their 16-year old brother, also in state care. Having looked at this case, it is clear that these young women posed no danger to their brother, for whom they care deeply, and, instead, Families SA used the directions in an attempt to isolate and hence make the child in their care more compliant. Sound familiar?

Unfortunately, they are not the only family members of children in state care to be prosecuted under these offences. My office has accessed via the Chief Magistrate the sentencing remarks of all the prosecutions for offences against sections 52AAB or 52AAC, and all are against family members. Two are against uncles and one is against a father, although he was acquitted.

The sentencing remarks do not convey all the necessary details to assess whether these directions were issued contrary to the minister's stated intention. In fact, it would seem that the magistrates themselves were unsure of Families SA's concerns about the defendants and hence why the notice had been issued in the first place. However, it is clear that in at least one of these prosecutions the defendant posed no danger to his niece, who had seemingly rocked up on his doorstep looking for a place to stay. Noting this, the magistrate only sentenced him to a small amount of community service.

Given these cases and the prosecution against the two young women, it is clear to me that Families SA is using these offences as a case-management tool and not to protect children from the exploitation referred to by Commissioner Mullighan, as was intended. Given the apology that we have all just made in this parliament due to an abuse of power that seems to be generational, my questions to the minister are:

1. Is the minister at all concerned that Families SA is using the directions under the abovementioned sections contrary to the stated intention of the provision in this parliament?

2. Will the minister detail the process by which such orders are issued, including any crosscheck mechanism that may exist?

3. Will the minister commit to undertaking a review of these two offences?

4. Given the stated intention of section 52AAB, does the minister consider that perhaps it would be more appropriate for the police to be given the role of issuing these directions, taking it out of the hands of Families SA entirely?

The Hon. I.K. HUNTER (Minister for Communities and Social Inclusion, Minister for Social Housing, Minister for Disabilities, Minister for Youth, Minister for Volunteers) (14:48): I thank the honourable member for her very important questions and for her ongoing interest in this very important area. I undertake to take that question on harbouring offences under the Children's Protection Act 1993 to the Minister for Education and Child Development in the other place and seek a response on her behalf.