Director of Child Protection Litigation Bill 2016
Plain English Summary
Overview
This bill creates a new independent Director of Child Protection Litigation who will decide when to apply for child protection orders and run those cases in the Childrens Court, a role currently performed by the child safety department. It implements a key recommendation from the 2013 Queensland Child Protection Commission of Inquiry to improve evidence standards and accountability in child protection cases.
Who it affects
Children and families in the child protection system, child safety department staff, and the lawyers, courts and community organisations involved in child protection proceedings. It commences on 1 July 2016.
Key changes
- Creates an independent Director of Child Protection Litigation — a senior lawyer appointed by the Governor in Council for up to five years, not under Ministerial control
- Only the Director can apply for, vary, revoke or appeal a child protection order; the child safety department must refer matters with a brief of evidence
- The Director must consult with the chief executive (child safety) and give written reasons if deciding to do something the department disagrees with
- New offences of up to 100 penalty units or 2 years' imprisonment for misusing confidential information about children and families
- Expands Child Death Case Review Panels so they also review the Director's conduct after a child dies or is seriously injured
Bill Story
The journey of this bill through Parliament, including debate and recorded votes.
▸Committee16 Feb 2016View Hansard
Referred to Legal Affairs and Community Safety Committee
The Health, Communities, Disability Services and Domestic and Family Violence Prevention Committee examined the bill and recommended it be passed with nine additional recommendations. The bill establishes the Director of Child Protection Litigation as an independent statutory officer to improve accountability and evidence quality in child protection court proceedings, implementing a key recommendation from the Queensland Child Protection Commission of Inquiry. The government accepted some recommendations, including amending the review period from five to three years, but rejected proposals to reduce the DCPL's term of office and to separately publish operational guidelines.
Key findings (5)
- The bill implements a recommendation from the Queensland Child Protection Commission of Inquiry to establish an independent statutory officer responsible for deciding which matters warrant a child protection application and litigating those applications
- Stakeholders raised concerns about basing DCPL staff in Brisbane given they would regularly work across Queensland, and about the balance between the DCPL's independence and appropriate oversight
- Queensland Alliance for Kids and other submitters raised concerns that the 'least intrusive order' principle could result in children being placed on short-term orders when long-term orders would better serve their interests
- The Queensland Family and Child Commission advocated for an external review or appeal mechanism for cases where the Chief Executive does not agree with the DCPL's decisions
- The union Together raised concerns about the impact of reforms on regional areas and the removal of existing court coordinator positions
Recommendations (10)
- The committee recommends that the Director of Child Protection Litigation Bill 2016 be passed.
- The committee requests that the Minister provide a response to the House addressing stakeholder concerns about basing DCPL staff in Brisbane.
- The committee recommends that the Minister respond to the House addressing concerns raised by stakeholders and clarify how clauses 5 and 6 ensure the best outcomes for children.
- The committee requests that the Minister assess whether clause 13 strikes the right balance between independence and oversight and advise the House accordingly.
- The committee recommends the Minister consider the appropriate mechanism for including the desirability of the DCPL having experience in child protection.
- The committee recommends the Minister consider reducing the term of office for the DCPL to three years and aligning the end of the first term with the first review of the bill.
- The committee recommends clause 41 be amended to ensure a review of the Act three years after commencement.
- The committee recommends that the DCPL publish its guidelines.
- The committee requests that the Minister address stakeholder concerns regarding the right of review of the DCPL's decisions in the House.
- The committee recommends that the Minister advise the House of the grounds on which a request from the Department to the DCPL to apply for a child protection order can be refused.
Committee report tabled
▸Second Reading11 May 2016View Hansard
▸11 members spoke11 support
As Minister for Child Safety, introduced the bill establishing the Director of Child Protection Litigation as an independent statutory body to improve the quality of child protection order applications and create a separation between litigation and child safety casework.
“The establishment of the Director for Child Protection Litigation within the Justice portfolio will improve the quality of evidence brought before the court.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
Supported the establishment of the Director of Child Protection Litigation while raising concerns about costs and the Brisbane-based model's effectiveness in regional areas.
“It is wonderful to see the continuation of bipartisan support for strengthening the child protection system in Queensland.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
As committee chair, supported the bill establishing an independent statutory office for child protection litigation, noting the committee's recommendation that the Act be reviewed after three years rather than five.
“The purpose of the amendments is to achieve better outcomes for families and children involved in child protection court proceedings.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
Supported the bill while raising concerns about the cost of the Brisbane-based model, the breadth of the director's discretion and the lack of external review mechanisms for departmental disputes with the director.
“I rise to support the contribution from the shadow minister for communities, child safety, disabilities services and the prevention of family and domestic violence.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
Supported the bill as part of the government's commitment to implement inquiry recommendations for building a sustainable child protection system.
“These bills reflect the Palaszczuk government's commitment to implement the recommendations of the Queensland Child Protection Commission of Inquiry.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
Supported the bill while raising concerns about the Brisbane-based model's ability to serve regional Queensland and the cost implications.
“As the shadow minister, the member for Mudgeeraba, has indicated, the LNP will be supporting these bills.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
Supported the bill as part of the bipartisan child protection reform agenda.
“From the outset can I say that it is a great day as parliamentarians to find bipartisan support on such an important issue.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
Supported the bill while noting the importance of adequate resourcing and monitoring of the new statutory body.
“Unfortunately, it seems that legislators are having to do more and more with respect to dealing with the abuse and neglect of children not only in Queensland but across Australia and throughout the world.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
Supported the bill as part of the comprehensive child protection reform agenda.
“Along with the 121 recommendations the message was clear: the system was under immense strain.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
Supported the bill while noting the committee's consideration of both bills together.
“On 1 July 2012 the previous LNP government established the Queensland Child Protection Commission of Inquiry after inheriting a child protection system under enormous stress.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
Supported the bill as part of the comprehensive child protection reform.
“Sadly, not all children in our communities are living in safe homes and environments.”— 2016-05-11View Hansard
▸In Detail11 May 2016View Hansard
Amendments 1-2: Clarify that the chief executive of the Department of Communities does not need to refer interim child protection orders to the Director of Child Protection Litigation, as interim orders often change based on circumstances.
Amendment 3: Reduce the statutory review period for the Director of Child Protection Litigation Act from five years to three years, implementing the committee's recommendation 7.
Amendments 4-6: Technical editorial amendments to correct drafting, update cross-references to reflect the director's new role in making child protection order applications, and remove references to departmental officers who are no longer authorised to do so.
Referenced Entities
Legislation
Organisations
Programs & Schemes
Sectors Affected
Classified using AGIFT/ANZSIC Australian government standards