Lin Thorp (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Nothing is more important than protecting vulnerable children from abuse and neglect. If we do not, as a community we deny those children the opportunity to reach their full potential and to live full and rich lives. Each child and young person in our community has the right to grow up in a safe and supportive environment. However, it is a sad reality that some children and young people in our society are subject to harm and abuse.

Child abuse is commonly defined as an act of a parent, caregiver, other adult or older adolescent that has the capacity to endanger the physical or emotional health or development of a child or young person. Child abuse may be used to describe a single act or a number of incidents that take place over time towards a child, including physical abuse, emotional maltreatment, neglect, sexual abuse or the witnessing of family violence. We know that child abuse and neglect is connected to poverty, long-term unemployment, mental illness, lack of affordable housing, drug and alcohol abuse and social isolation. The outcomes are lower educational attainment, increased likelihood of drug abuse and criminal activity, poor health, a greater likelihood of teen pregnancy and a lesser probability of finding meaningful employment.

There can be no area of social policy that deserves a higher priority than protecting children. Child protection services ensure that children and young people are cared for, protected from harm and nurtured in a way which allows each individual child to realise and achieve their full potential. Child protection is primarily a state responsibility and the system varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Variations arise due to factors such as funding, outsourcing, payments allocated to those providing care and the overall emphasis each state places on the importance of such service delivery.

In Tasmania, just as in all other states, the state parliament has legislated services and programs which continue to be underpinned by state-based judicial systems. Until 2009, when the National Framework for Protecting Australia's Children 2009-2020 was agreed upon, this ensured that child protection took a predominantly legalistic focus and approach. The national framework was agreed upon by COAG and has ensured that child protection, regardless of state jurisdiction, is viewed as an element within the public health sphere. The national framework also recognised the increasing role played by non-government organisations and agencies in delivering crucial services to families experiencing difficult circumstances. National priorities have been developed which place emphasis on building capacity and expertise, increasing the support available for young people who are leaving care, developing national standards for out-of-home care and increasing the ability to share information and research amongst state governments and organisations.

It is well established that young people who reach the age of 18 and are leaving care to transition into independent living are amongst the most vulnerable and disadvantaged within our community. We must ensure that these young adults have support networks in place as they make their transition into adulthood, giving them every possibility to lead vibrant, independent and productive lives.

The development of national standards for out-of-home care models must also take into account cultural considerations of children and young people in our society. In the 2007 report commissioned by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, it was reported that, within the out of home care population, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children continue to be overrepresented. Any out-of-home care policy model which is developed must ensure that the family, community and cultural identities of these children and young people are sustained.

The National Framework for Protecting Australia's Children includes universal preventative initiatives to support all families and children, early intervention services targeted to vulnerable families and children, and targeted services and programs for at risk families. Minister Julie Collins, a fellow Tasmanian, must be congratulated for her wonderful work in this area.

In Australia, there have been sustained increases in the demand for child protection services and, unfortunately, the demand continues to grow. There is also as an emerging trend which highlights a preference towards foster and kinship care over residential care. The need for increased resourcing and consistent and effective policy direction is a challenge that we need to acknowledge. Accompanied by the reality of this increasing demand for child protection services is an academically informed and increasingly dominant perspective which recognises the importance of early intervention. Early intervention has the ability to make such a difference when provided in the right way and at the right time. It is well established that preventative techniques and early intervention are cost effective over the long term for our community.

We must ensure that any future policy focus places an emphasis on preventing abuse and family breakdowns. If we have the capacity to work with families who are experiencing difficulties in overcoming problems at an early stage, we can not only better protect at risk children but also build stronger communities.

In Tasmania, the delivery of child protection services primarily falls within the scope of the Department of Health and Human Services. A recent report suggests that when a system is overwhelmed, undesirable responses are taken to relieve pressure. These undesirable responses include possibilities such as the act of prematurely closing cases, removing children from homes as a first response, or providing inadequate support resource constraints. We must not allow such practices to arise.

We must ensure that we have a system which consistently and without doubt places a priority on the best interests of the child, particularly their wellbeing, growth and development. We have granted child protection workers the greatest responsibility, and that is to protect our children. We must not allow these men and women to be overworked, overwhelmed or underpaid. We must strive to do all we can, within our ability, to ensure that we do not let these men and women down.

Today, there are many challenges faced by our child protection workers. In their words, from the recent report prepared for the Community and Public Sector Union, the issues are: inadequate resources; unallocated cases; insufficient intervention services to prevent children entering care; staff recruitment and retention; case load sizes leading to insufficient support for children in care and carers; and quality of services, such as generic care plans. These issues demand urgent attention. While some states such as Western Australia place a cap on case loads at 15, it is common practice in my home state of Tasmania for child protection workers to be operating with case loads of between 20 to 30 cases at a time. This means that child protection workers in my state may become subject to overseeing between 20 and 30 investigations at any one time, placing these working men and women in incredibly difficult circumstances, particularly when individual cases are complex and intense. An underfunded system in Tasmania constrains options for children and young people. Children are often limited to being placed in either foster care or therapeutic residential care placements.

At present, I do not believe our state or federal governments have an adequate grasp of the importance of this issue. State and federal governments must understand that the protection of our children from neglect and abuse calls upon a large resource commitment, and this is a call we, as elected representatives, must respond to. If we do not act now, child protection systems in Australia will continue to encounter problems. We must be very cautious as workloads are contracted out to non-government organisations, as this will decrease the ability of the public to scrutinise and hold to account the practices and outcomes for children who enter the system.

Protecting our children may be a whole-of-community responsibility, but it is our child protection workers who are at the coalface. They know what is needed. They know that if they are overloaded, if their colleagues are not replaced when they are on leave, it is the children who will suffer. They are dedicated professionals who deserve to have the resources and tools to do their job as they see fit. They see the awful outcomes when that care is not given. They see the wasted lives. Ironically, they are also the ones who bear the brunt if anything goes wrong. This unfairness must be addressed, or we will lose good people. They will become risk averse if they have not become so already. I call on all our states and territories to give child protection the priority and importance it needs.