Commission for Children and Young People Bill (No 2); Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Bill (No 3); Ombudsman Amendment (Child Protection and Community Services) Bill (No 3)

Parts 2 and 3

The Hon. A. G. CORBETT [11.52 a.m.]: It is indeed a great honour to be the first to move an amendment on these important bills. I move A Better Future for our Children amendment No. 1:

No. 1 Page 4, clause 4. Insert after line 11:

(4) It is the intention of Parliament that the Commission be adequately funded to ensure that it is able to undertake its principal functions.

It is most important that the commission is adequately funded to undertake all its functions as outlined in clause 11 of the bill. Without the necessary resources, certain functions would be compromised. This point was emphasised repeatedly in discussions I have had, including discussions with the Queensland Children’s Commissioner and the former Commissioner for Children in New Zealand, Laurie O’Reilly, who died recently.

This amendment will not guarantee or impose upon the Government any obligation to provide adequate funding, but as a statement of intent by the Parliament it will underline to future governments and to the people of New South Wales the importance of the commission. At the very least it will give the new commissioner some legislative authority for requests for funds to enable the commission to meet its stated functions. On 17 November the Attorney General referred to funding in his reply to the second reading debate as follows:

I also put on record, as Minister Lo Po’ did in her address in reply in the Legislative Assembly, that the Commission for Children and Young People and the Ombudsman will be adequately funded to carry out their important functions.

I draw to the Attorney’s attention that Minister Faye Lo Po’ late at night said, "I want to state up-front that the new commission of the Ombudsman will be funded to carry out important work." I am pleased that on behalf of the Government the Attorney emphasised that the Commission for Children and Young People and the Ombudsman will receive adequate funding. Resourcing is critical to the success of that bill.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [11.55 a.m.]: The Government cannot accept this amendment. Funding is a prerogative of the government of the day. As the Hon. A. G. Corbett said, the Government has indicated that the commission will be adequately funded to undertake its important functions.

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [11.55 a.m.]: As a matter of principle the Opposition believes the commission should be funded adequately, as should the Office of the Ombudsman in its work not only under this proposed legislation but in all its work. In view of my past comments about underresourcing of the Community Services Commission it is fair to say that I endorse the spirit of the amendment of the Hon. A. G. Corbett. However, as the Government is not prepared to accept the amendment, I indicate that the Opposition will not seek to jeopardise the passing of this legislation by accepting the amendment. I place on record that the Opposition in government will work to ensure that the commission and the Ombudsman are adequately funded to undertake the work. Given our full support for the role of the commission, I could do nothing else than indicate our intention.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA [11.56 a.m.]: I support the amendment of the Hon. A. G. Corbett. It would be important to have included in the bill the intention of the Parliament that the commission be adequately funded to perform its functions satisfactorily. I strongly support this amendment.

The Hon. A. G. CORBETT [11.57 a.m.]: Given that both the Government and the Opposition have indicated their respective positions, I shall not seek to divide on the amendment.

Amendment negatived.

The Hon. I. COHEN [11.58 a.m.]: I move Greens amendment No. 1 as circulated:

No. 1 Page 4, clause 5. Insert after line 14:

(2) A person is not eligible to be appointed as Commissioner unless the person has been jointly nominated for that position by the Premier, the Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

This amendment provides that a person is not eligible to be appointed as a commissioner unless
Page 10105
the person has been jointly nominated by the Premier, the Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The amendment ensures that the person appointed has bipartisan support, otherwise it may be considered to be a political appointment not independent of the government of the day. Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile proposes an amendment to Greens amendment No. 1. The Greens will accept that amendment.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [11.59 a.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party supports in principle the amendment of the Hon. I. Cohen. However, the inclusion of the words "Chief Justice of the Supreme Court" presents problems because of the division of powers between the parliamentary and judicial aspects of the legislation. For that reason I move:

That the amendment be amended by omitting "the Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court", insert instead "and the Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly."

If my amendment were accepted, the commissioner would be nominated jointly by the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition. The amendment does not refer to any political party. If at some point in the future the political situation changes, the nomination procedure would still apply. Because of the sensitive nature of the position of children’s commissioner this is a fair way to remove any doubt or criticism about the appointment. It would help to maintain bipartisan support for the children’s commissioner and prevent that position becoming a political football.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [12.01 p.m.]: I appreciate the rationale behind both these amendments. It can be expressed briefly as bipartisanship, but the Government cannot accept either amendment. With regard to the amendment proposed by the Hon. I. Cohen, it is absolutely clear that one cannot have the Chief Justice involved in appointments of this nature. For that reason the amendment is inappropriate.

The modified version proposed by Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile would create a precedent. It would mark this position out from many other sensitive statutory appointments made by the Government. For example, the appointment of a Chief Justice does not have to be bipartisan, it does not require the acquiescence of both sides of Parliament. Agreement between the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition is not required for the appointment of the head of the Independent Commission Against Corruption. Many other appointments of great importance and sensitivity are made by the Government of the day. That is the prerogative of the Government. If it makes the wrong appointment, it can be criticised for that. The Government does not accept the principle that the Leader of the Opposition needs to agree to the appointment of this commissioner, however sensitive and important the position may be.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA [12.02 p.m.]: I express my support for the amendment of Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile. I believe it would be inappropriate to require the Chief Justice to endorse such an appointment, but it is important that the appointment be bipartisan. The Attorney just said that this does not happen with other appointments, such as the head of the Independent Commission Against Corruption. I am not sure whether that is correct and whether there is not some consultation. Even if what the Attorney said was correct - and I am sure he made the statement in good faith - this is a first, and our children are important enough in our society for this to be a most welcome first.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [12.03 p.m.]: I take the point of the Attorney General that this may be a precedent, but he has presented a good argument why the amendment should be supported and a precedent set. In future, all sensitive appointments should have a similar requirement. The Labor Government has been very critical of the current Commissioner of the Independent Commission Against Corruption. Much of that tension about an appointment would be avoided if there was more co-operation between the leaders of both sides of Parliament.

The Hon. J. R. Johnson: The former Government was critical of Mr Temby.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE: Yes, and it does not matter which party is in government. The principle should apply to both. If the Liberal-National parties come to office, the same principle should apply and they should consult with the Labor Opposition. This amendment has an advantage.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [12.04 p.m.]: May I just draw the distinction between consultation, which may be desirable in relation to sensitive appointments, and the veto right that is contemplated by the amendment.

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [12.05 p.m.]: I find the reaction of the Government to this clause extraordinary, to the extent that I am told that if I support the amendment moved by
Page 10106
Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile, which is my inclination, the Government would pull the bill. Every member of the Chamber wants the children’s commission to have bipartisan support. They want the appointment of the commissioner to be made in a bipartisan manner well above politics.

The suggested amendment, which Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile proposes to amend further, would provide an appropriate mechanism to ensure the bipartisan nature of the appointment. It is not without precedent. Sometimes Queenslanders do things in funny ways, but in Queensland the Premier, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Justice make such appointments. I accepted the argument of the Government about the lack of separation of powers in relation to a position involving both Parliament and the judiciary, but I was not aware that the Government would not accept the idea of the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition having to agree to such an appointment.

With all the rhetoric about this bill, the Government has tried to emphasise it is doing something above politics. It is establishing a position to safeguard the rights of children, to improve the lot of children in New South Wales. These things are beyond politics. In a sense, it is my call. I know that if I go along with the crossbenchers we will win the vote on this amendment but risk losing the bill.

We could go down that path and the debate could end at this point, but I recall messages from people such as Dr John Yu. Also, from talking with the Association of Children’s Welfare Agencies and people like Garry Moore representing the Council of Social Service of New South Wales I know how important this commission is to everyone. The fulfilment of Commissioner Wood’s recommendations is too important, even if it is in a different form from what he proposed. It is a real dilemma for me because I have been convinced by the arguments of the crossbenchers, yet the Government says that if I support the amendment it will pull the bill. Although in principle I support the amendments, I will not vote with the crossbenchers.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES [12.07 p.m.]: That is an extraordinary thing to say, but I do understand the coalition not supporting the amendment. The Hon. Patricia Forsythe is saying, essentially, that we are being blackmailed into not supporting an amendment that the majority of members of this Chamber support. It does not damage the bill in any way and it ensures that the appointment to this position is supported in a bipartisan way. It is outrageous that the Attorney can threaten to withdraw a bill when the majority of members support the amendment. It is an insult to this Chamber.

Amendment of amendment agreed to.

Question - That the amendment as amended be agreed to - put.

The Committee divided.

Mrs Arena Mr Tingle
Dr Chesterfield-Evans
Mr Corbett Tellers,
Mr Jones Mr Cohen
Mrs Sham-Ho Rev. Nile

Mr Bull Mr Moppett
Dr Burgmann Mr Obeid
Ms Burnswoods Dr Pezzutti
Mr Dyer Mr Primrose
Mrs Forsythe Mr Ryan
Mr Gallacher Ms Saffin
Miss Gardiner Mr Samios
Mr Hannaford Mr Shaw
Mr Johnson Mr Rowland Smith
Mr Kaldis Ms Tebbutt
Mr Kelly Mr Vaughan

Mr Kersten Mr Willis

Mr Lynn Tellers,
Mr Macdonald Mrs Isaksen
Mr Manson Mr Jobling

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment as amended negatived.

The Hon. I. COHEN [12.17 p.m.]: I move Greens amendment No. 2:

No. 2 Page 4, clause 5(3), line 19. Omit "4 years". Insert instead "5 years".

This amendment increases the commissioner’s period of appointment from four to five years. At present the bill provides that the commissioner be appointed for only four years and that she or he may not be appointed for more than two successive terms. The Greens consider that this is a short period when compared with the terms of appointment of other commissioners such as the Commissioner of Community Services, who is appointed for five years, and the full-time commissioner of the New South Wales Law Reform Commission, who is appointed for seven years. The Greens envisage problems with a four-year time frame.

Page 10107

The commissioner will need time to get the commission up and running without worrying about her or his reappointment. Uncertainty about reappointment occurs at least nine months before an appointment is due, very much like the re-election of a State government. In the final year before an election a government spends a great deal of effort on re-election rather than on other issues. The Commissioner of Children and Young People would be put in much the same position if the appointment were for only four years. In the Greens opinion, appointments of four years impose a real constraint on the independence of the commissioner. I consider five years to be a more beneficial and appropriate term of appointment and I commend this amendment to the Committee.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [12.18 p.m.]: The Government is prepared to support this amendment.

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [12.18 p.m.]: The Opposition supports the amendment. A benefit of a five-year appointment is that such a term will break away from the political cycle of four-year terms. Should this bill be passed, we would expect the appointment of the Commissioner of Children and Young People in the first part of next year, and after a full term of appointment there will be a complete break from the political election cycle. This amendment also ties in with the appointment terms of other commissioners such as the Commissioner of Community Services.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA [12.19 p.m.]: I support the amendment and I support the comments made by the Hon. Patricia Forsythe. This amendment is most important. There is great advantage in changing the appointment period of the commissioner to five years, as that will break away from links with the four-year parliamentary term.

Amendment agreed to.

The Hon. I. COHEN [12.20 p.m.], by leave: I move Greens amendments Nos 3, 4 and 8 in globo:

No. 3 Page 5, clause 8(1), line 19. Omit "8 members". Insert instead "9 members".

No. 4 Page 5, clause 8(2), line 24. Insert "child advocacy," after "child development,".

No. 8 Page 7, clause 11. Insert after line 27:

(f) to encourage effective advocacy for children,

Clause 16 provides that the commission does not deal directly with complaints or concerns of particular children. The bill seems to prohibit individual advocacy but allows systemic advocacy. This is despite the report of the inquiry into children’s advocacy emanating from the Standing Committee on Social Issues, and particularly its recommendations Nos 6 and 11. In the foreword to that report the chair of the committee, former member of the Legislative Council the Hon. Ann Symonds, said:

Advocacy for children is about systems and individuals recognising the rights and needs of all children and young people and responding to those rights and needs.

She also said:

In the more narrow sense advocacy is also about providing children with quality individual advocates to ensure that they have the right of equal access to the law and processes of government.

The committee identified certain groups of young people most in need of effective advocacy - children who have been neglected or abused, children who are in the care and protection system, and children who are from poor, minority or marginalised communities. Those children are some of the most vulnerable and powerless members of the community. Recommendation No. 11 of the report related to setting up a network of youth advocates attached to community legal centres across the State. These amendments leave the door open for a network of child and youth advocates to be established under the legislation. Amendment No. 3 increases the number of expert advisory committee members from eight to nine. Amendment No. 4 adds an extra field that is needed on the committee. I commend amendments Nos 3, 4 and 8 to the Committee.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [12.22 p.m.]: The Government cannot accept the amendments. It takes the view that not just one but all members of the committee should be advocates for children. Older children will be able to participate more actively in the commission’s consultative work. The child development expert will be able to focus on the needs of infants and younger children who cannot participate directly. The Government has previously made its position on advocacy clear, that is, it is against establishing an advocacy network in legislation as part of the Commission for Children and Young People. The Government is of the view that children and young people are most likely to seek help from an adult whom they know and trust.

Page 10108

The Government believes that advocacy is a skill that workers should have rather than the vocation of a select few. Parents, teachers, district officers, youth workers and community visitors are all well positioned to provide support, information and advice to children and young people. The Commission for Children and Young People will alert the Government if the support for children and young people is not sufficient. The Government has already announced that when the commission is established it will ask it to report on the best means of improving assistance to children who may have no-one else to turn to for help.

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [12.23 p.m.]: The Opposition does not support these amendments. I reiterate that when in government the coalition will appoint a children’s advocate under the umbrella of the commission. I make the same point as the Attorney General just made when looking at the child-related expertise in fields of health, education, child protection and child development, disabilities, the law, employment, sport or the arts: all of those people have to have expertise in child advocacy in the sense of being able to talk about promoting the needs and interests of children as a broad class. As the focus is on children as individuals obviously more work needs to be done relating to that.

I was interested in the arguments put forward by the Hon. I. Cohen but he did not satisfy me, without the clear support of the Government, that an expert in child advocacy should be on the advisory committee. In relation to finding a person with expertise in children’s advocacy, many people become advocates on behalf of children but that does not necessarily mean that they have the necessary expertise for the advisory committee that is envisaged under this legislation.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [12.25 p.m.]: Clause 8 provides for an expert advisory committee made up of experts. I believe that advocacy could be provided under clause 8(3), which states that the commission may appoint such other advisory committees as it considers appropriate. The logical development of that proposal is that those committees could be more specialist committees in different areas, such as advocacy. The Christian Democratic Party does not support the amendments.

The Hon. A. G. CORBETT [12.26 p.m.]: In his speech in reply to the second reading debate the Attorney General said that the Minister for Community Services has announced that the Government will ask the commission, as soon as it is established, to inquire into the best means of improving assistance to children who have no-one else to turn to for help. That is important. The report of the Standing Committee on Social Issues Inquiry into Children’s Advocacy, which it completed in 1996, will be a key source for the commission’s work. A lot of people were looking for an assurance that its recommendations would not be lost in time. I accept the Attorney General’s commitment on this matter, and I place on record that in this instance the Government has accepted some movement on advocacy, which I appreciate.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA [12.26 p.m.]: I support the amendments. Advocacy is the key word and a most important function. I welcome the commitment of the Opposition that it will set up an advocacy unit when it is elected to government. In the meantime I would like the advocacy role of the commission to be set out in the legislation.

Amendments negatived.

The Hon. I. COHEN [12.28 p.m.]: Greens amendments Nos 5 and 6 are the same as Opposition amendments Nos 1 and 2. Therefore I will not move them.

The Hon. Patricia FORSYTHE [12.28 p.m.], by leave: I move Opposition amendments Nos 1 and 2 in globo:

No. 1 Page 7, clause 10(a), line 5. Omit all words on that line. Insert instead:

(a) the safety, welfare and well-being of children are the paramount considerations,

No. 2 Page 7, clause 10(c), line 10. Omit "well-being". Insert instead "safety, welfare and well-being".

These amendments will make quite clear the principles governing the work of the commission. One could argue that the wellbeing of children is an all-encompassing term and could also be taken to apply to the safety and welfare of children. In my opinion "safety and welfare" is the principle that should govern the work of the commission and, indeed, constitute the principal functions of the commission.

A similar clause is used in the Children (Care and Protection) Amendment Bill, which is before the other House. It was intended that the children’s commission would absorb the work of the Child Protection Council and the child deaths review team. It is appropriate when dealing with issues such as safety - which is fundamental to the work of the child deaths review team - and welfare, which has been fundamental to the work of the Child
Page 10109
Protection Council, not simply to use the term "wellbeing". The importance of that term should be spelled out and emphasis given to the need for the commission to focus on those issues.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [12.31 p.m.]: The Government supports the amendments. The inclusion of these words has been the subject of consultation already. The Government considers that the term "wellbeing" used in the bill encapsulates the concepts of safety and welfare. However, it is clear that a number of child welfare groups consider that the commission should have a more obviously defined role in the safety and welfare of children. In supporting the amendment I should state that the commission is to have a broad focus on issues relating to children and young people; its sole focus will not be child protection. This view was put strongly in many submissions and in particular was supported by young people who were consulted about the commission.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA [12.33 p.m.]: I support the amendments and am pleased that the Government has accepted them. At least these important functions will now be included as part of the role of the commission.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [12.33 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party is pleased to support the amendments. It is important that these words, particularly the word "safety", be included in the principles relating to the work of the commission.

Amendments agreed to.

The Hon. A. G. CORBETT [12.34 p.m.]: I move A Better Future for our Children amendment No. 2:

No. 2 Page 7, clause 10(c), line 8. Omit "the relationship". Insert instead "a co-operative relationship".

Clause 10 outlines certain principles that will govern the work of the commission. Clause 10(c) refers to the importance of the relationship between children and their families and between children and their community for the wellbeing of children as being one of the principles that is to govern the work of the commission. The amendment describes the type of relationship the commission should have as a principle, that is, to ensure the wellbeing of children. That relationship is simply a co-operative one.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [12.35 p.m.]: The Government supports the amendment, which clarifies the intention of the principle. Children’s most significant relationships are with their families and communities. They will benefit most if that relationship is positive, supportive and co-operative.

Amendment agreed to.

The Hon. I. COHEN [12.35 p.m.]: I move Greens amendment No. 7:

No. 7 Page 7, clause 11(b), line 18. Insert "safety, welfare and" before "well-being".

This amendment and those moved earlier by the Opposition would extend the principles that govern the work of the commission, particularly those which are to be given paramount consideration. Currently only the wellbeing of children is of paramount consideration. No mention is made of child protection issues in the principles. The Greens consider that the bill exhibits a surprising lack of focus on child protection issues. Commissioner Wood recommended that the commission be the overarching child protection watchdog with appropriate powers and the capacity to oversee and co-ordinate delivery of services for the protection of children from abuse.

The Child Protection Council has a number of functions, but currently has no legislative basis. Commissioner Wood recommended that the children’s commission have attached to it a centre for child protection which should inherit the present functions of the Child Protection Council and also have additional powers. However, the Centre for Child Protection is not a feature of the bill. At the very least the issue of child protection should be included in the principles and functions. The amendment in particular inserts into clause 11(b) the words "safety and welfare" before the word "well-being" in the function "to promote and monitor the overall well-being of children in the community and to monitor the trends in complaints made by or on behalf of children". I commend the amendment to the Committee.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [12.37 p.m.]: The Government will support the amendment. The inclusion of these words has been the subject of consultation. The Government takes the view that the commission must have a broad focus on issues relating to children and young people. The amendment will give full effect to that objective.

Page 10110

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [12.37 p.m.]: The Opposition supports the amendment, which sits with the earlier amendment regarding safety and welfare and the monitoring of trends of complaints made by or on behalf of children.

Amendment agreed to.

The Hon. I. COHEN [12.38 p.m.]: I move Greens amendment No. 9:

No. 9 Page 8, clause 11. Insert after line 5:

(k) to keep under scrutiny the systems in government and non-government agencies for preventing child abuse and for handling and responding to child abuse allegations.

Commissioner Wood envisaged that the commission would play a major role in monitoring the work of child protection in the State. However, the powers given to the Ombudsman in these bills to play a role in keeping the overall child protection and child abuse prevention systems relating to employees in New South Wales under scrutiny appear to make the Ombudsman and not the commission the overarching child protection watchdog. The Greens consider that the newly established commission should have this role, or at least have some role in keeping under scrutiny child protection systems.

The Greens amendment would ensure that the commission had a role in keeping under scrutiny the systems in government and non-government agencies for preventing child abuse and for handling and responding to child abuse allegations. The amendment is much broader than the clause in the Ombudsman Amendment (Child Protection and Community Services) Bill, which states:

The Ombudsman is to keep under scrutiny the systems:

(a) for preventing child abuse by employees of designated government or non-government agencies or of other public authorities, and

(b) for handling and responding to child abuse allegations, or child abuse convictions, involving those employees.

The clause is directed towards systems involving employees. The Greens amendment would cover non-employee systems. If honourable members support the amendment they will then have to decide whether they wish both the Ombudsman and the commission to have roles in keeping under scrutiny systems for preventing child abuse, in which case they would support this amendment but not proposed amendment No. 2 to the Ombudsman Amendment (Child Protection and Community Services) Bill. However, if honourable members consider that the commission should have the sole responsibility for keeping under scrutiny systems for preventing child abuse, they will support this amendment and proposed Greens amendment No. 2 to the Ombudsman Amendment (Child Protection and Community Services) Bill. I commend the amendment to the Committee.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [12.39 p.m]: The Government opposes the amendment. The Community Services Commission already keeps these systems under scrutiny. Furthermore, under its current list of functions the children’s commission can monitor trends in complaints, including child protection complaints. The majority of submissions on the Government’s green paper on the children’s commission argued strongly that the commission should have a broad basis.

The Hon. A. G. CORBETT [12.40 p.m.]: One of the roles of the new commissioner will be to convene the child deaths review team. It should be kept in mind that certain members of that team have an extensive background and experience in handling child abuse matters.

Amendment negatived.

The Hon. I. COHEN [12.40 p.m.]: As the proposed Greens amendments Nos 10 and 11 are similar to Opposition amendments Nos 3 and 4, I will not move them.

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [12.40 p.m.], by leave: I move Opposition amendments Nos 3 and 4 in globo:

No. 3 Page 8, clause 14(1), lines 20-23. Omit all words on those lines. Insert instead:

(1) The Commission and other government or non-government agencies that provide or deal with services or issues affecting children must work in co-operation in the exercise of their respective functions.

No. 4 Page 8, clause 14(2), line 27. Insert "(or access to documents)" after "information".

Clause 14 has been the subject of lengthy discussion with community groups. Under the heading, "Co-operation with other agencies" it states:

In exercising its functions, the Commission is to work in co-operation with such government or non-government agencies . . .

It is the view of everyone who has looked at this legislation that it is the role not only of the
Page 10111
commission, but of government and non-government agencies to work in co-operation in all aspects of their work. Amendment No. 4 states that in addition co-operation is to extend to the exchange of information and includes the provision by agencies of information and access to documents. In other words, the Opposition is strengthening clause 14. This issue has been the subject of considerable community discussion and is one on which the success of the bill would have turned.

Had there not been an absolute willingness by the Government to seek that co-operation be expressed by the insertion of the words "access to documents" I suspect that this would have been a one-way street - there was no obligation on government or non-government agencies to work co-operatively with the commission - and I suspect that many of us would not have wanted the legislation to proceed in its present form. I thank the Government for supporting this amendment. The strengthening of this clause will mean that the wishes of interest groups that have a strong interest in the welfare of children may be accommodated. Clauses 14 and 16 demonstrate the strength of the Government’s willingness to support a commission with some teeth. The Government’s recognition of this clause is a measure of its acceptance that the legislation as drafted was not perfect. This clause will considerably strengthen the Commission.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [12.42 p.m.]: The Government supports the amendments. The Government anticipates that co-operative relationships with government and non-government agencies will be essential to the commission’s work. The amendments clarify the intention of the bill.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA [12.43 p.m.]: I support the Opposition’s amendments. The Attorney said that the Government anticipates the co-operation of government and non-government agencies. We want more than that; we want it embodied in the legislation. It is good that this provision has been included, because access to documents is most important. We all know how easy it is to deny access to important documents, even with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [12.44 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party supports the amendments. It is important that the word "documents" be spelt out, not just the word "information". This is particularly so in light of the fact that some employees of the Health Department who were supposedly caring for young males have in fact abused those males. Any records or documents involving those aspects should be made available to the commission to enable it to follow up complaints.

Amendments agreed to.

Amendment by the Hon. Patricia Forsythe agreed to:

No. 5 Page 8, clause 14. Insert after line 28:

(3) A reference in this section to the provision of access to documents includes a reference to the provision of copies of documents.

The Hon. I. COHEN [12.46 p.m.]: I move Greens amendment No. 12:

No. 12 Page 8, clause 14. Insert after line 28:

(3) The obligation under this section of government and non-government agencies to co-operate with the Commission includes the obligation to provide the Commission with relevant information or access to relevant documents required by the Commission for the exercise of its functions. This subsection applies irrespective of any arrangements made by Ministers under subsection (2).

This amendment extends the co-operation requirements in amendments Nos 10, 11 and 12A. Co-operation with the commission includes the obligation to provide the commission with relevant information or access to the relevant documents it requires. This is important, because without it the commission will not automatically have access to important information that it needs to carry out its work.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [12.47 p.m.]: The Government cannot accept this amendment, because it would give the commission very vast powers to require any agency to hand over documents no matter how sensitive or confidential they may be. For example, child-care centres or large charitable organisations could be required to hand over documents. That is an excessive power to confer upon statutory officers. It could require personal and sensitive information to be handed over without any apparent fetter, or safeguards. The bill provides for special inquiries to be conducted by the commission. Clause 21 of the Commission for Children and Young People Bill empowers the commission in certain defined circumstances to require documents to be produced. However, the amendment provides a much more general and unrestricted power which the Government does not believe is justified.

Page 10112

Question - That the amendment be agreed to - put.

The Committee divided.

Mrs Arena
Mr Cohen
Mr Jones
Rev. Nile
Tellers,
Dr Chesterfield-Evans
Mrs Sham-Ho

Mr Bull Mr Obeid
Dr Burgmann Dr Pezzutti
Ms Burnswoods Mr Primrose
Mr Dyer Mr Ryan
Mrs Forsythe Ms Saffin
Mr Gallacher Mr Samios
Miss Gardiner Mr Shaw
Mr Hannaford Mr Rowland Smith
Mr Johnson Ms Tebbutt
Mr Kaldis Mr Tingle
Mr Kelly Mr Vaughan
Mr Kersten Mr Willis
Mr Lynn Tellers,
Mr Macdonald Mrs Isaksen
Mr Manson Mr Jobling

Question so resolved in the negative.

Amendment negatived.

The Hon. I. COHEN [12.56 p.m.]: As Greens amendment No. 12A was covered by Opposition amendment No. 5, I will not move it.

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [12.56 p.m.]: The Opposition will not move amendment No. 6 because, in my opinion, the wording of the Greens amendment in respect of the same clause is better.

The Hon. I. COHEN [12.57 p.m.]: I move Greens amendment No. 13:

No. 13 Page 9, clause 16. Insert after line 7:

(2) The Commission may, despite subsection (1), provide children and their families, friends and advocates with information about and referral to government and non-government programs and services.

This amendment will allow the commission to make available to children, young people, their families, friends and advocates a one-stop referral and information service regarding government and non-government agency programs and services. The Greens consider this a useful if not necessary role for the commission. I commend the amendment.

The Hon. FRANCA ARENA [12.58 p.m.]: This is a most important amendment. Everyone would envisage the commission as a one-stop shop. Honourable members all know how difficult it is for children and young people to face their abusers and to refer to matters of abuse. Often, the victims of abuse are sent from one police station to another, or to a special group. It is most important that children and young persons be able to go to the commission and be referred to the proper government or non-government programs or services. Therefore I fully support the amendment moved by the Greens.

The Hon. PATRICIA FORSYTHE [12.59 p.m.]: The Opposition supports this amendment. Earlier I referred to resources. No doubt over time resources will be necessary for the commission to work as a one-stop shop, as envisaged by the Hon. I. Cohen. The Opposition believes that the amendment will strengthen the role of the commission in terms of providing assistance to individual children and make the commission more a part of the community than it might otherwise have been.

The Hon. J. W. SHAW (Attorney General, Minister for Industrial Relations, and Minister for Fair Trading) [1.00 p.m.]: The Government supports this amendment. It does not intend the commission to deal with individual complaints or concerns of children as they can be dealt with by other bodies, such as the Ombudsman or the Community Services Commission. This amendment clarifies that the commission may nonetheless consult individual children and consider the issues they raise during that consultation. The bill already has a strong focus on children’s participation in decision making and in the work of the commission. The Government believes that this amendment will further strengthen that approach.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [1.01 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party also supports the amendment. As I noted during the second reading debate, a multiplicity of organisations deal with issues affecting children. It is preferable to have only one body which has all the information and can make referrals to the correct area.

Page 10113

Amendment agreed to.

Parts as amended agreed to.

Progress reported from Committee and leave granted to sit again.

[The President left the chair at 1.02 p.m. The House resumed at 2.30 p.m.]