Hon Giz Watson questions the Department of Community Development's ability to return children to natural parents following a Supreme Court case, and whether the Department is delaying decisions pending new legislation. The Department denies delaying tactics and states it adheres to court decisions.

AnsweredQoN 2347Legislative Council
Asked
24 August 2004
Portfolio
Community Development, Women's Interests, Seniors and Youth

QuestionView source ↗

In light of the Supreme Court of Appeal case of the
Director General of the Department of Community Development v T’hart & Ors WASCA 110 (2003)
ruling, I ask -
(1) Is the Department able to carry through plans for the return of children to their natural parents following the decision in this case?
(2) Have there been instances where the Department of Community Development has not returned children to their natural parents or another foster home as a result of this decision?
(3) Should a foster carer appeal a decision made by the Department of Community Development, would the likelihood of a Supreme Court injunction prevent the Department proceeding even if there were concerns of abuse in the foster home?
(4) How many foster parents have threatened to appeal using the above decision as a precedent?
(5) Is the Department delaying in these cases awaiting the passage of the
Children and Community Development Services Bill
in the hope that future appeals against a decision of the Director General will go to the Case Review Board and that the final point of appeal will be the State Administrative Tribunal?
(6) If yes to (5), what is happening to children who should now be in the process of moving home to their natural families?

AnswerView source ↗

Answered
21 September 2004
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Community Development, Women's Interests, Seniors and Youth
Response time
28 days
(2) No. (3) The Department is bound by any decision made by the Supreme Court. However, the Department would apprise the Supreme Court of all relevant facts before the Supreme Court made its decision, in order to protect children. (4) The Department is not aware of any such actions. (5) No. (6) Not applicable.
(3) The Department is bound by any decision made by the Supreme Court. However, the Department would apprise the Supreme Court of all relevant facts before the Supreme Court made its decision, in order to protect children. (4) The Department is not aware of any such actions. (5) No. (6) Not applicable.
(4) The Department is not aware of any such actions. (5) No. (6) Not applicable.
(5) No. (6) Not applicable.
(6) Not applicable.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more