ESTIMATES COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS – 17 JUNE 2010
Sorry, she gave evidence at the coronial inquest about regulations being drafted.
Ms GARDINER-BARNES: Can I introduce Leonie Warburton. Leonie is the Senior Director of Out of
Home Care Services in NTFC.
Ms WARBURTON: I am trying to
think back, because I was here while Ms Scott gave her evidence. If
they are the provisions under the
Community Welfare Act under section 63, the draft regulations
which Clare has just referred to are comparable to those that were under the previous
Community
Welfare Act, section 63, so we have really just lifted them up, and now we are looking to place those
as the placement regulations under the new
Care and Protection of Children Act.
Ms CARNEY: Of course, the coronial findings were delivered in January, but as we know, the case
went over for a significant period of time in 2008, I think. Okay. So the
regulations will be done at
some point, they are in the pipeline?
Ms WARBURTON: Yes.
Ms CARNEY: Okay. The Coroner was also concerned about the lack of external review in the act. He
noted that the act created the position of Children’s Commissioner, however he said:
There is no provision in the act which guides or controls the Commissioner in how to exercise
his functions. No specific powers are conferred on the Commissioner to obtain documents,
examine persons, or carry out types of investigations. This is in contrast to the detailed
provisions about the Commissioner’s powers to investigate complaints. The act should be
amended to remedy those significant omissions.
Why has the act not been amended as recommended by the Coroner?
Mr VATSKALIS: Again, at the risk of repeating myself, I said we have an inquiry coming up, the
inquiry will provide a number of recommendations the government has already said we are going to
adopt and, I expect, because
they brought on an inquiry, a number of these issues would be erased. I
think it is premature for us to change the act or to amend the act before the end of the inquiry.
However, we will be using the whole package of the Coroner’s inquiry and the inquiry
recommendations in order to proceed to do the necessary amendments to the act.
Ms CARNEY: Okay. Recommendation 7 from the Melville Inquest was:
Part 5.1 of the act should be amended to provide for a regular two yearly review of the
administration of the act insofar as it relates to protected children and to confer more specific
powers on the Children’s Commissioner to enable him or her to conduct such a review.
Just for the sake of the record, I assume it is the same answer you have provided, minister.
Mr VATSKALIS: And I think it is a fair recommendation that would considered when we actually go
back and we have a look at the recommendations.
Ms CARNEY: Minister, your predecessor did not take up our recommendation
for the inquiry to have
as one of its terms of reference to inquire into whether existing legislation is adequate to provide
effective child protection services. Hence, legislative change – and you should know this – is not
going to be considered by the inquiry. You have said repeatedly in answer to my questions: ‘No, we
are not going to make that change; we are waiting for the inquiry.’ They are not even within the terms
of reference of the inquiry.
Minister, it is clear you are not across this. It is clear to me and, I am sure, others, that you are just not
doing anything because you cannot be bothered and you do not care, and you
just want to wait until
the inquiry whereupon, apparently, everything is going to magically fix itself. You must have known
ESTIMATES COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS – 17 JUNE 2010
that the inquiry does not consider whether existing legislation is adequate.
Mr VATSKALIS: I resent your accusations for the simple reason the inquiry will come down with a
number of recommendations. These recommendations, despite the fact it is not in their terms of
reference to look at the legislation, will have a certain impact on what we have to do and how we are
going to address it, and there will be incidents we have to address and amend the legislation. As a
matter of fact, next Wednesday there will be a workshop for legislative changes in the act. We are
looking at many aspects – you do not have to specifically put it in the terms of reference to look at the
legislation. A number of these
recommendations will come, I am sure will come, because of
experience I have had since I have been in the portfolio that requires some, if not big changes in the
legislation, and we are prepared to do that.
Ms CARNEY: Minister, you are presumably aware of the
Inquiries Act, you are presumably aware of
the purpose of giving an inquiry terms of reference.
Mr VATSKALIS: Absolutely.
Ms CARNEY: Are you seriously suggesting that you do nothing, that the inquiry looks at things
beyond its brief, and therefore that is a satisfactory situation? You are kidding me.
Mr VATSKALIS: The terms of reference for the inquiry were drafted before my time as minister …
Ms CARNEY: Oh,
not your fault? Okay.
Mr VATSKALIS: I am giving you
my assurance, should amendments be required to the legislation. It
will happen.
Ms CARNEY: Right. Have you told the board of inquiry, have you amended the terms of reference so
the board of inquiry does have within its remit to comment on the adequacy or otherwise of Northern
Territory legislation for the protection of children? Have you told them that?
Mr VATSKALIS: I have in the panel three experts in child protection. They are not just following the
government’s line; these people are given free rein to do whatever it takes to fix the problems, to
identify the problems with child protection services in the Northern Territory. These people are going
to come with a stack of recommendations, these are what we
are going to examine, assess and
adopt, and make the necessary changes at as many levels of the organisation and the legislation
should it be required.
Ms CARNEY: I do not recall seeing the words ‘free rein to do anything’ in the inquiry’s terms of
reference. I will move from this shortly, but I think it is open for others to conclude there is what
amounts to inertia on the part of the government in this area, and it is just hoping that around about
September answers will appear. That is very disappointing.
Mr VATSKALIS: No, answers will not appear in September. What will appear in September will be
the results of the inquiry and the recommendations. Answers will be given from this government; the
only government in the past seven years has done something about children services in the Territory.
Ms CARNEY: Let us talk about caseloads, because caseloads has come up in the well known
coronial investigations, report after report, estimates in the past, and I would like to see whether
anything much has changed. You would know in one of the coronial inquests one case
worker gave
evidence that she had 118 cases on her books. Others have acknowledged caseloads were in the
area of 70 or 80, and that was about average. I believe you predecessor publicly acknowledged that
was so for some case workers.
Has the department set benchmarks for caseloads for workers?