Children in State Care

The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (15:41): I rise to place on the public record, at the request of a constituent Mr Ki Meekins, concerns he has about the process involved through the court structure, and subsequently the Attorney-General's Department payments, for very tragic and unfortunate circumstances that occurred to Mr Meekins when he was a young person. I am not personally having a go at the Attorney-General here; it is the department that I want to see get its act together in the interests of Mr Meekins.

I have to say that whilst it has been difficult for Mr Meekins, in terms of what he encountered in his early years of life, he has been a mature, committed and articulate representative not only for himself but also for the hundreds of other young people who suffered when they were placed under government care, whether that be directly in government homes or in foster care placements.

In contact my office has had with Mr Meekins, the Attorney-General's office alleged that he was not eligible for an ex gratia payment as the Supreme Court decision that was handed down in 2001 awarded him a sum of money that was for both the departmental failures and anything of a sexual nature that occurred back then. Clearly there are two separate matters. The first is the failure of the state to report significant issues of sexual and other misconduct to a person under state care to the police, which was the subject of the Supreme Court matter, and the second matter is the sexual abuse of a minor. I believe it therefore stands to reason that Mr Meekins would have been entitled to compensation both from the state, regarding its neglect, and also as an ex gratia claimant.

I am advised that an ex gratia payment has been offered to Mr Meekins. I am not aware of the exact circumstances of that, nor do I want to know them, but I understand that it was not a generous offer whatsoever and was, in fact, arguably way too low an offer for what Mr Meekins had experienced. I contacted the Attorney-General's office on 24 September 2014 regarding this matter, and we did receive a letter from the Attorney-General saying that the matter was being investigated.

There was no indication of when it would be finalised, and I informed Mr Meekins of this through my office on 29 January 2015. It is now 18 March 2015, and my understanding is that this matter has still not been finalised, after dragging on since 2001. People like Mr Meekins have to suffer enough as a result of what I have just highlighted to the parliament, but to think that they then have to wait so long to get some form of compensation for the terrible things they have had to encounter during their younger life: we have to do better than this.

All of my colleagues would support me in calling on the Attorney-General's Department to really focus diligently and with some compassion for these victims. They are victims. They have had to live with this from when it occurred, ongoing for their whole life, and a lot cannot be champions for their rights as Mr Meekins has been. I trust that the fact that Mr Meekins has been out there lobbying for others as well as himself would not be an adverse factor in any delays. I have no evidence that it would be, but I highlight the fact that sometimes when people go out there and make representations, some people in the bureaucracy take offence to that and tend to delay situations.

In doing the right thing by my constituent, as requested by Mr Meekins, I have brought this matter to the notice of the parliament, and I look forward to the department increasing its efforts to get this matter finalised as some small compensation for the horrendous situation that Mr Meekins has admirably lived with right through his life. I hope we get a result very soon.