Working with Children Legislation (Indigenous Communities) Amendment Bill 2018

Argued the bill creates too great a risk to children by shifting the benefit of the doubt to the applicant rather than the safety of the child. Advocated for increasing support services and access to blue card services instead of creating a separate system.

“The LNP cannot support the bill because it creates too great a risk to children. The LNP will always put the safety and welfare of children first and, as I said, this bill fails to do this in that it shifts the benefit of the doubt to the applicant for the card rather than the safety of the child.”— 2020-05-19View Hansard

As the bill's sponsor, argued that the blue card system creates barriers to employment in Indigenous communities, contributing to family dysfunction and youth crime. Proposed allowing Community Justice Groups to make binding recommendations on blue card applications for community members without disqualifying offences.

“I visit these communities and I say, 'What is the big problem up here?' and I am told, 'Mate, none of us can get a blue card.'”— 2020-02-18View Hansard

Opposed the bill as contrary to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse and the Queensland Family and Child Commission blue card review, both of which found there should be no conditional or different types of working with children clearances.

“While one has to be sympathetic to the issues the bill seeks to address, one has to place weight on the recommendation of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, which found that nationally there should be no conditional or different types of working with children clearances.”— 2020-05-19View Hansard

Opposed the bill as contrary to recommendations of the Royal Commission and the QFCC that there should be no conditional or different types of working with children clearances. Acknowledged valid concerns about the blue card system's impact on First Nation peoples and outlined government initiatives to improve support and reduce application withdrawals.

“While well intentioned, a quick-fix response such as that proposed by the private member's bill would lead to a lowering of child protection standards in discrete communities, run contrary to the recommendations of both the royal commission and the QFCC and may lead to a number of other unintended consequences such as an increase in harm to vulnerable children.”— 2020-02-18View Hansard

Argued the bill strengthens the process by enabling community justice groups to consult with police and relevant authorities on blue card decisions, and that communities know their members best. Stressed this is not about relaxing rules around sexual predators or serious crime.

“This bill creates a framework which strengthens the process by enabling the community justice group to consult with the police and relevant authorities on whether an individual should be issued with a blue card.”— 2020-05-19View Hansard

Acknowledged the worthy policy intent but opposed the bill due to significant flaws that could inadvertently subject children to risk of harm, including concerns about bias in community justice group decision-making and the unreasonable 21-day timeframe for assessments.

“The potential unintended consequences of this bill are serious in nature. That is why the opposition is unable to support the bill on this occasion.”— 2020-02-18View Hansard

Argued the bill places possible employment opportunities over the safety of children and is in direct opposition to the recommendations of the Royal Commission and the QFCC blue card review. Supported the committee's recommendation that the bill not be passed.

“Let us be clear about where this bill sees that balance fall, and it is not in favour of protecting our children.”— 2020-05-19View Hansard

As committee chair, outlined that the bill proposed a two-tiered blue card system contrary to recommendations of the Royal Commission and QFCC. Noted the government's support initiatives had reduced application withdrawals in discrete communities from 17.8 per cent to 4.4 per cent.

“I do not think the interests of any community are served by having a lower standard of protections in place for that community's children than applies to others.”— 2020-02-18View Hansard

Acknowledged the bill's intent to overcome employment barriers but concluded that creating a two-tier system is not the answer, citing concerns about governance, accountability, and the risk of compromising child safety standards.

“Creating a two-tier system is not the answer. The creation of a families justice group is not the answer. Putting this amount of risk into decision-making is not sustainable and comes with much risk.”— 2020-05-19View Hansard

Opposed the bill arguing it would create different standards for children in remote Indigenous communities and potentially place their lives at risk, while acknowledging the well-intentioned nature of the proposal. Called for the existing system to be fixed rather than creating a new parallel framework.

“The stories of delays in processing and appeals shows a broken system. Let us fix the system.”— 2020-02-18View Hansard

Drew on her experience travelling to remote communities with a parliamentary committee, noting the divergence of views within communities about the bill. Concluded she does not support the bill but is keen to see further development in this space.

“My takeaway from this experience in travelling to the remote communities was that there is much more work to be done.”— 2020-05-19View Hansard

As former chair of the committee that originally considered the bill, opposed it on two grounds: during community consultations he saw negative notices were for serious offences he agreed warranted refusal, and not all community members supported the bill.

“Child safety is such a serious issue that it is not something I think we should compromise.”— 2020-02-18View Hansard

Argued that the blue card system inadvertently discriminates against Indigenous people and traps them in welfare dependency. Called for community autonomy in blue card decisions, saying no-one knows communities better than those who live there.

“Without the ability to access the blue card system, inadvertently these people are discriminated against and are unable to get into these lines of work.”— 2020-05-19View Hansard

Acknowledged the bill's potential benefits for child placement under the Child Protection Act but opposed it due to lack of monitoring and compliance mechanisms, and the creation of different standards for children in different communities.

“It is our job to ensure laws are as strong as they can be made, as robust as they can be enforced and as clear as they can be.”— 2020-02-18View Hansard

Argued the bill proposes impractical legal solutions that undermine protections for First Nation children by placing community justice group members in an untenable decision-making position that may compromise child safety.

“We should never allow for the standards that have been established to be eroded in any part of Queensland, especially not in the areas of Queensland where our children are our most vulnerable.”— 2020-05-19View Hansard

As Minister for Child Safety, opposed the bill citing the Royal Commission's recommendation against conditional working with children clearances and the QFCC's endorsement of that position. Emphasised the government's commitment to addressing over-representation of Indigenous children in child protection through the Our Way strategy.

“We simply cannot dilute the framework we have built around our kids to keep them safe. We must insist on the highest standards to keep our kids safe.”— 2020-02-18View Hansard

Supported the intent behind the bill and recognised that the blue card system disproportionately affects Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, but ultimately would not support the bill due to concerns about privacy, community engagement, and potential lowering of safeguards for children in remote communities.

“At the outset I will say that we support the intention behind this bill and that the Greens recognise that the blue card system has a disproportionate and unfair impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Queensland.”— 2020-05-19View Hansard

Drew on his experience with the Police-Citizens Youth Club to acknowledge the blue card system can be clunky and difficult to navigate, but opposed the bill as containing too many risks to child safety. Acknowledged the member for Traeger had achieved results in drawing attention to the issue.

“There is a reason we have blue cards. There is a reason we have serious and/or disqualifying offences and negative notices, and that is the protection of our children.”— 2020-02-18View Hansard

Supported the bill as a step toward giving Indigenous communities empowerment and autonomy in blue card decisions. Argued that local people should have input rather than decisions being made by bureaucrats in Brisbane.

“No-one in their right mind wants to see the blue card system watered down. I am not going to so much focus on the employment aspect or the implications for meaningful employment, which has been canvassed by a number of members including the member for Hinchinbrook, but I will say that having a pen pusher in Brisbane making decisions about people in communities thousands of kilometres away is just not right.”— 2020-05-19View Hansard

In reply, passionately defended the bill as empowering First Australian communities to make their own decisions about who works with their children. Argued meaningful work for parents is fundamental to addressing youth crime and substance abuse in remote communities.

“We empower our First Australian communities to make the decisions for themselves on what is best for their community. Isn't that bold? Isn't it bold that we let them make the decisions, not us down here?”— 2020-05-19View Hansard