Motions

Child Protection

Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. L.A. Henderson:

That this council—

1. Recognises that the child protection system in South Australia is overwhelmed;

2. Recognises that South Australia spends less than the national average on services to prevent children from entering care; and

3. Calls on the Malinauskas government to provide earlier, more intensive intervention for at-risk families before they fall into crisis.

(Continued from 9 March 2023.)

The Hon. B.R. HOOD (17:36): I thank our shadow assistant minister for child protection for bringing this important motion to the chamber. I note that the government moved amendments at a very late hour, at about 2.13pm yesterday. They do not look like amendments but more like a completely new motion, patting themselves on the back. It is unfortunate that they do that, because the child protection system in South Australia is overwhelmed, and it is hard to think of a more important duty of our state government than providing safety, security and shelter to our most vulnerable and at-risk children.

I have had the great privilege of meeting, and hearing stories from, many of our state's dedicated and compassionate foster and kinship carers. I say 'privilege' because they are invariably kind and caring people. In an ideal world, I would not have to get to know these generous South Australians who volunteer their time and their home to care for our state's most vulnerable citizens. In an ideal world, I would never have to meet them because they would never have to share with me their harrowing experiences of navigating the child protection system, its bureaucracy and the tin ears—unfortunately—of the Minister for Child Protection and of Premier Malinauskas as well.

I have heard so many devastating stories that have resulted in real and significant physical and emotional harm to children. I have heard of unethical actions taken by the staff of the child protection department; I have heard of awful treatment of carers by DCP staff. So far, in my relatively short time in this place, I have heard nothing, absolutely nothing, apart from disappointment from carers, about the Minister for Child Protection, who is also the Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing. I want to reflect on that because I believe, and I think most people in this state would believe, that child protection should have its own dedicated minister. They should not be sharing those responsibilities with sport, with racing and with recreation, however much we do like those things.

I had the pleasure of meeting with The Carer Project, headed up by Joyce Woody and Lisa O'Malley, and have been inspired by their passion and commitment to drive meaningful change in the child protection system. Along with the Hon. Laura Henderson and the shadow minister for child protection, the member for Heysen, The Carer Project have enlightened me on the extent of the significant structural issues within the DCP. Lisa and Joyce and their 500-strong movement have been loud and vociferous in their advocacy on behalf of our state's foster and kinship carers. They have led the change in driving real reforms in this space, so much so that the peak body, Connecting Foster & Kinship Carers, have adopted the policy proposals that they have consistently and vehemently been advocating for.

The Carer Project has been unashamedly vocal in calling out wrongs where they see them. They have raised these concerns directly with the Minister for Child Protection, directly with DCP's executive and directly with Premier Peter Malinauskas.

While the carers have welcomed some of the changes we have seen at the top of the department's hierarchy, they have been left bitterly disappointed with the lack of engagement, the obfuscation and the lack of advocacy on behalf of the Minister for Child Protection. It must be kept front of mind of the minister, and for all of us in this place, that foster and kinship carers ultimately are volunteers, and no other volunteer pays out of their pocket like carers do. Collectively, they save the taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars through opening their hearts and homes to troubled children.

I recently received correspondence from the minister in response to a letter I wrote on behalf of many carers who shared their concerns with me. In my letter I expressed to her their disappointment that they received no meaningful engagement regarding changes to the Children and Young People (Safety) Act. While recommendation 7 from the independent inquiry into foster and kinship care to create a Carer Council has now been rolled out, I have heard that carers were not given the opportunity to provide input or elect representatives. The Carer Council, after all, was established to, in the words of the minister, amplify the voice of carers through delivering direct advice to the minister and DCP.

It came as a shock then to be told by a carer that one of the Carer Council members was in fact employed by the Department for Child Protection. Thinking this could not possibly be true, I specifically asked the minister about this in my letter. Unfortunately, that question was ignored and I was instead told the membership of the council was formed through a comprehensive independent recruitment process. The minister was at pains to say that she took immediate action on several of the recommendations that came from the independent inquiry into foster and kinship care.

Dr Arney's November 2022 report extensively documents the concerns of carers about the current system, resulting in the first six recommendations specifically naming processes that will improve current inaccuracies. Dr Arney's terms of reference made it clear that the department's unjust complaints management process was a prominent reason for establishing the inquiry.

Instead of acting on those first six recommendations that hundreds of carers have been calling for, the minister has confirmed to me that she does not support establishing an independent complaints mechanism. To have that confirmed in black and white was a shock for many carers, and I found it particularly galling that in the same sentence, as the minister confirmed her lack of support for an independent complaints mechanism, she went on to say, 'I do, however, support the need for a transparent and rigorous complaints process.' Well, minister, you had six recommendations to choose from that would deliver what you said you would support, so what is the hold-up?

Another direct question I put to the minister in my letter's request for an update on her election commitment, a solemn promise to over 400 carers to review the outcomes of the independent inquiry's recommendation, was also ignored. I further raised concerns put to me by foster and kinship carers, including the need for carers to have standing in court, the need for the respite payments to be legislated, the necessity for an increase in base rate payments to keep up with the cost of living, and the need for better reporting on serious injuries to children. Needless to say, I have received unsatisfactory answers to each of them.

The minister confirmed that carers were not recognised as a legal party to court proceedings, but acknowledged the important role that carers play under the Children and Young Persons Act—more so importantly, apparently, that carers can at best make a written submission to the court only after applying to the court to do so. Prior to the election, in a personal meeting between the carers project, now Premier Malinauskas and the now Minister for Child Protection explained to them how carers were being shunted to the halls of the courts like babysitters.

When it comes to respite payments, this Labor government has thrown the carers scraps. Carers will now receive a little over $15 extra per week to access respite-like supports. To say this is a drop in the ocean when it comes to caring for children with complex additional needs is an understatement, particularly when combined with what carers are telling me is their number one concern in this cost-of-living crisis: the need for an increase in their base rate payments is needed immediately.

I could speak ad nauseum on the litany of issues and harrowing stories that have been shared with me:

unsubstantiated and completely unwarranted care concerns levelled at carers doing nothing wrong;

the Minister for Child Protection ignoring carers' pleas to help, despite raising evidence of abuse;

DCP ignoring and overriding the advice of medical professionals;

the inappropriate reunification of children with drug-addicted parents, resulting in physical abuse;

acts of forgery by NGOs;

abuse of process and spiteful treatment of carers by DCP staff;

rude and dismissive treatment of carers by the Carer Council members;

carers not receiving respite after many decades of caring;

special needs loading payments being frozen for years;

the deliberate exclusion of carers and a lack of transparency when utilising the child assessment tool; and,

informal kinship carers without access to funding or services.

Ultimately, what carers want is accountability: accountability to carers' statements of commitment, accountability of DCP staff to the law of the land, accountability from NGOs, accountability of the peak bodies to the carers they represent, and accountability of the minister and this Premier to carers for their broken promises and commitments.

It is not only the child protection system that is overwhelmed; I believe, as the carers do, that it is the minister. I reiterate the calls of the Liberal opposition and those carers for this vital portfolio responsibility to have its own standalone minister. I commend this important motion to the chamber and thank every carer in this state.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. I.K. Hunter.