Julia Banks (Chisholm, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, I present the committee's report, incorporating a dissenting report, entitled Breaking barriers: a national adoption framework for Australian children, together with the minutes of proceedings.

November is National Adoption Awareness Month, and today I am delighted to present the report of the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, Breaking barriers: a national adoption framework for Australian children. In doing so, I would first like to acknowledge former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's heartfelt support for this inquiry on the basis that all Australian children deserve love and stability and that a national approach could address and break down the barriers.

I'd also like to reaffirm the committee's resolve to ensure a forward-looking approach to adoption and assurance that the past practices of forced adoption are never to be repeated. A forward-looking approach means that the best interests and safety of the child must be absolutely paramount considerations when making any decision about their adoption. Nothing is more important than providing children with safe, secure and nurturing homes.

There are over 47,000 children in Australia living in out-of-home care. While many are with relatives or kin, there are far too many who are stuck in long-term foster care or residential care. The system is trapping many of these children into an unhealthy cycle. One of the biggest problems facing children in out-of-home care is the lack of permanency. Children are likely to bounce around the system from carer to carer, in some cases experiencing over 10 placements. We know that these children have poorer outcomes. They face constant change and instability on top of the trauma that led them to out-of-home care in the first place. This is a national issue that needs a national solution. It's time we gave these children a better option.

The report is about breaking the barriers that are preventing vulnerable children from enjoying the safety, security and wellbeing that a permanent adoptive family can provide. Currently, there are very few adoptions in Australia. Less than 250 Australian children were adopted last year, and we have one of the lowest adoption rates in the world. We know that inconsistent adoption laws in states and territories are a barrier to adoption. There are different rules for consent, different rules for reunification with families, different time frames for how long children must wait for a permanent home and different rules for adoption from foster care. The committee has therefore recommended a national law for adoption.

This will improve complexity and improve consistency. It also means children won't have to wait longer for permanent families, no matter where they live. Importantly, we recommend the national law for adoption, where suitable, provides for open adoption. Open adoption is different from the closed adoptions in the past. Closed adoptions were shrouded in secrecy. Adopted children's original birth certificates were sealed. Amended birth certificates were issued that established the child's new identity and relationship with their adoptive family as if their original family did not exist. The practice was strongly condemned in many submissions and considered a barrier to adoption.

Open adoption is different. There is no secrecy and no loss of identity. Children do not lose; they stand only to gain. Open adoption means that children remain connected to their birth family, their culture and their identity. It can provide a profound sense of belonging and safety. It can stop the merry-go-round of foster carers and give children permanent families not just for childhood but for life. We've also recommended the use of integrated birth certificates, which include the details of the children's birth parents and adoptive parents. Integrated birth certificates state the facts; they do not conceal or deny the past.

The committee has made other recommendations to improve adoption processes. The committee has recommended child-centric time frames for making decisions about permanent care so that children do not have to wait any longer than necessary. We also recommend streamlining processes to make adoption easier and so data collection can be improved.

Childhood is fleeting. Every child deserves a safe, happy childhood providing them with the best possible foundations for the future. Removing the barriers to adoption can only be a positive move. We know that adoption will not suit all children who are in out-of-home care; however, there are many who will never be able to return to their birth families. It is these children that need to be given a profound sense of place. We need to give them permanent stable homes. We need to give them permanent stable families. We need to give them and their families legal permanency and we need to break the barriers standing between these Australian children and a brighter future.

Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has contributed to this inquiry. We valued immensely your participation and hope our work can help achieve better outcomes for all Australian children, who deserve love and stability. I commend the report to the House.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Given this is the first opportunity I have to welcome the new member for Wentworth, it's a great pleasure to see her sitting on the benches here today. I would like thank the chair and the committee for this opportunity to make some remarks about Labor members' dissenting report. I'm joined by all of the Labor colleagues who participated in the committee process; the member for Macarthur and the member for Lindsay are here today. I'd like to thank everybody who wrote submissions to this inquiry and took the time and effort to appear before it. I'd also like to give thanks at the outset for the support from the secretariat under the leadership of Shennia Spillane. I acknowledge their presence here today.

Regretfully, Labor cannot support the government's report, which, contrary to government claims, will ultimately see a return to Australia's reprehensible legacy of permanently removing First Nations children from their families. We know that this policy has a profoundly disproportionate impact on First Nations children. From the beginning of this inquiry, we have been dogged by complaints of bias and preconceived outcomes from organisational representatives and First Nations organisations and individuals in particular. Some stakeholders said that they had been actively excluded in favour of witnesses who supported adoption. I know that the secretariat have been very challenged, in trying to respond to these concerns raised by stakeholder groups, and that they have done their best. But, I have to say, Labor committee members held their own concerns that the outcome of this inquiry was a foregone conclusion.

First, some background: in March this year, the then Assistant Minister for Children and Families, David Gillespie, sparked community outrage with an unprompted public call to open up adoptions of Indigenous children from out-of-home care. Unsurprisingly, the proposal was quickly condemned by experts and First Nations representatives alike, with the AbSec chief executive labelling it 'incredibly offensive'. Rather than listening, the minister in fact doubled down by referring this inquiry to the committee just a few weeks after he made those inflammatory comments. If Labor was suspicious about the referral of the inquiry, its suspicions were indeed confirmed by the first of only two terms of reference, which called for the consideration of 'stability and permanency for children in out-of-home care with local adoption as a viable option'—a virtual echo of the minister's ill-conceived call.

Regretfully, but as Labor members predicted, the government members' report went on to recommend that we open up adoption to children in out-of-home care, exactly as the minister had suggested. Attempts by Labor to work through a bipartisan position for a consensus report were rejected. This is a shame, but it confirmed that the sole purpose of the report was to support the minister's original assertion. Labor members simply cannot countenance this recommendation, which would have a detrimental and disproportionate impact on First Nations communities, given that their children are 10 times more likely to be in out-of-home care. It will cast aside the evidence based Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle. It severs children's links to their family and culture, and risks creating another stolen generation.

The government members' report not only wilfully ignores the weight of evidence from submitters but also flies in the face of human rights conventions and the recommendations of countless inquiries that connection to kin, culture and country is critical to the safety and wellbeing of First Nations children. The proposed plan in the government members' report rests solely upon diverting children from out-of-home care into open adoption, which purports to be about providing an open exchange of information and contact between children and their birth parents and families. However, many witnesses told the committee that their lived experience of so-called open adoption was very different. Indeed, there is no agreed definition of 'open adoption', let alone how it works.

In my few remaining moments, I urge this government to reconsider its position. Organisations and individuals have pleaded with us not to return to those despicable policies of the past. Sadly, their concerns have been ignored. I plead with the government not to make the same mistake, and to reconsider these recommendations.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for statements on this report has expired. Does the member for Chisholm wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a later occasion?

Julia Banks (Chisholm, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In accordance with standing order 39, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.