CARE AND PROTECTION OF VULNERABLE CHILDREN

Friday 9^th November 2007

Rev Fred Nile MLC, Leader of the Christian Democratic Party, gave a moving speech on Thursday 8^th November 2007 in the NSW Parliament during debate over the tragic death of Shelly Ward, aged 7 years.

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: “This matter, which relates to children at risk in our State, has been brought on for discussion as a matter of urgency following the tragic and unnecessary death of Shellay Ward, aged 7. This child's death has again highlighted the care and protection of children by the Department of Community Services. In recent years the department has been under increasing and extreme pressure, as have similar departments in other States. I refer to the recent case of Dean, the little boy who was found in a suitcase in a pond, apparently disposed of by a parent. Since these incidences, honourable members have become even more concerned than previously about children at risk in this State.

As Government members have said, more than $1 billion has been poured into the Department of Community Services. If that amount of money has been made available, one must ask what is wrong. It is not simply a matter of more dollars. What can be done to make the department more responsive to the needs of the children in this State? We must address the administration of the Department of Community Services and the allocation and role of staff to ensure we get value for our dollar. In the past I have raised the issue of the pressure that has been placed on the department since the establishment of the hotline, which is now receiving 240,000 calls per year. The department has to investigate the calls and determine which children are at risk as opposed to those who do not face any serious problems. How does the department handle these issues and establish priority? It almost means that departmental staff have to see into the future and decide whether a complaint will develop into a serious case that requires their attention or whether there is no real danger and, therefore, resources would be wasted on such cases.

The basic problem seems to be the diversion of expert staff from minor cases to critical cases where children are obviously at risk from injury or death. Today we are focusing on the needs of children. That is the crucial issue. We have debated this sensitive issue for many years, and this has led to attacks by the Opposition on the Government, regardless of which part is in government. I have seen it year after year, as a member of this House. The issue we need to debate is the provision of genuine child protection for all children throughout New South Wales, whether they live in the city or the country, whether they live in a wealthy family, a middle-class family or a poor family, whether they are part of a black family or a white family. The challenge is for the department to identify children at risk and protect them. The department should provide help to parents who have an ability to care for their children in their own family environment. As can be seen in many cases, the major problem is with the parents. They either do not have the ability to care for their children or they do not want to exercise care for them. The department should provide assistance to those parents as a matter of priority. The department should focus not only on helping children or even removing them, but on helping parents to care for their children. In cases where it is shown that parents are completely irresponsible, the department has no choice but to remove the children in the short term or for lengthy periods.

The department must assess whether there is an urgent need to remove children who are at risk from their parents or where parents are not able to provide the necessary care. All members would agree that removal should be the last step. But, it seems from recent cases, it is a step that must be taken by departmental staff. Despite the pressure on the department of many needy cases, I have heard reports of departmental officers interfering in families that have no problems. In one case an officer removed a child from school without notifying the child's parents. In that case the family involved was both stable and loving. So at times there is mismanagement. In some cases officers may be overzealous when interference is not required, whereas other officers may miss something right under their noses in what is obviously a very serious case. I agree with the Hon. Charlie Lynn: there are many success stories in the non-government sector. I do not suggest they are perfect; they still have failures. But it is an area the Government should look at. The Government provides tremendous assistance to non-government organisations. In fact, those organisations—such as the Salvation Army and other community groups—could not operate without government assistance. Perhaps the Government could look at this issue more closely to see whether funds could be better used for that purpose.

Another challenge is the involvement of grandparents. I have received complaints from grandparents who want to help with children but the Department of Community Services staff have rejected their offers or pushed them to one side. Although parents have primary responsibility for their children, perhaps we could legislate a role for grandparents in that regard. I know of loving grandparents whose hearts are breaking because their own son or daughter does not care for their grandchildren in a responsible way.

The department also faces the challenge of working in a more difficult society than was the case in the past. Our society has changed. As far as communities are concerned, we do not live in a golden age anymore. There is a lack of community bonding and relationships. In the case of Shellay the media reported that when the authorities asked questions about the little girl, most of the neighbours said they did not know that children lived in the house in question. That highlights the isolation that families now face. We have lost that caring, neighbourly spirit whereby families care for each other and people notice when a neighbour's children have not been fed or are unwell and contact the Department of Community Services for assistance. Many of the community's needs now fall on governments whereas in the past society carried of the load. That has created a great deal of tension. Society is changing in a negative way such that the response from neighbours and the community is not the same as it was. Without giving details, I know of cases where children have died even after the department has closed the file on them.

Another challenge for the Department of Community Services is staff recruitment and training. We know there is competition in our society for well-paid jobs. The Department of Community Services needs to find highly motivated, caring people to recruit and train. Those who apply to work with the department need effective training to undertake their difficult role in a society that is, as I said, losing its values with an increase in family breakdowns and divorces and in the number of de facto partners who, it seems from many reports, are often involved in domestic violence and even violence against children in the home who are not their natural children.

We see in our society an increased incidence of physical and sexual abuse of children, whether by individuals—there have been recent reports of a grandfather abusing his own grandchildren and creating child pornography with them in order to make money—or by organised paedophile networks, which are clever at concealing their sexual and physical abuse of children from departmental staff and other authorities, such as police. This is a serious matter we are discussing today. It cannot be avoided; we have to confront it, but in doing so we should not be attacking one another. Let us unite to solve the problem.