❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding the Redress WA Scheme, seeking detailed information on payments, applicants, outcomes, and actions taken concerning identified perpetrators of abuse. The response reveals complexities in data collection and actions taken.
AnsweredQoN 5686Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Redress WA Scheme, and I ask —
(1) Have all Redress payments been finalised?
(2) If no to (1), how many are outstanding?
(3) For what reason are each of the payments identified in (2) outstanding?
(4) How many payments have been made under each payment level?
(5) How many offers of payment have been made under each payment level?
(6) How many Redress applicants died before receiving final payment?
(7) How many payments have been made to the estates of deceased Redress WA applicants?
(8) What is the total amount which has now been paid to Redress WA applicants?
(9) How many applications lapsed before completion?
(10) How many Redress applicants withdrew their application before it was finalised?
(11) How many applicants rejected the offer made to them under the Redress scheme?
(12) How many applicants were determined to be ineligible for payment under the scheme?
(13) How many applicants' payments have gone to unclaimed monies?
(14) What is the total amount of unclaimed Redress payments?
(15) How many applicants appealed their offer?
(16) How many applicants were successful in their appeal?
(17) How many people have contacted the Department about submitting a Redress application following closure of the Scheme?
(18) How many Redress applicants advised during the Redress process that they had not been paid wages for work they undertook as a state ward?
(19) Which institutions have been identified through the Redress process as sites at which state wards suffered abuse?
(20) For each institution identified in (19) —
(a) how many applicants received Redress payment for abuse occurring while they were resident at the institution; and
(b) how many payments were made at each payment level?
(21) How many cases have now been referred to police?
(22) How many people identified through the Redress process as perpetrators of abuse are currently working with children?
(23) How many people identified through the Redress process as perpetrators of abuse currently have valid Working with Children Check cards?
(24) What measures have been taken to address the issue of identified perpetrators who have current Working with Children Check clearances?
(25) Have children been removed from the care of any of the people identified in (23)?
(26) If yes to (25), how many carers have had children removed from their care?
(1) Have all Redress payments been finalised?
(2) If no to (1), how many are outstanding?
(3) For what reason are each of the payments identified in (2) outstanding?
(4) How many payments have been made under each payment level?
(5) How many offers of payment have been made under each payment level?
(6) How many Redress applicants died before receiving final payment?
(7) How many payments have been made to the estates of deceased Redress WA applicants?
(8) What is the total amount which has now been paid to Redress WA applicants?
(9) How many applications lapsed before completion?
(10) How many Redress applicants withdrew their application before it was finalised?
(11) How many applicants rejected the offer made to them under the Redress scheme?
(12) How many applicants were determined to be ineligible for payment under the scheme?
(13) How many applicants' payments have gone to unclaimed monies?
(14) What is the total amount of unclaimed Redress payments?
(15) How many applicants appealed their offer?
(16) How many applicants were successful in their appeal?
(17) How many people have contacted the Department about submitting a Redress application following closure of the Scheme?
(18) How many Redress applicants advised during the Redress process that they had not been paid wages for work they undertook as a state ward?
(19) Which institutions have been identified through the Redress process as sites at which state wards suffered abuse?
(20) For each institution identified in (19) —
(a) how many applicants received Redress payment for abuse occurring while they were resident at the institution; and
(b) how many payments were made at each payment level?
(21) How many cases have now been referred to police?
(22) How many people identified through the Redress process as perpetrators of abuse are currently working with children?
(23) How many people identified through the Redress process as perpetrators of abuse currently have valid Working with Children Check cards?
(24) What measures have been taken to address the issue of identified perpetrators who have current Working with Children Check clearances?
(25) Have children been removed from the care of any of the people identified in (23)?
(26) If yes to (25), how many carers have had children removed from their care?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
14 August 2012
Responded by
Minister for Community Services
Response time
63 days
(1) No
(2) 20 or 0.35%
(3) Nine applicants could not be contacted, seven relate to locating the beneficiaries of deceased applicants and four are rejected offers.
(4) Level 1 - 859
Level 2 - 1 813
Level 3 - 1 477
Level 4 - 1 063
(Total - 5 212)
(5) Level 1 - 866
Level 2 - 1 818
Level 3 - 1 478
Level 4 - 1 063
(Total - 5 225)
(6) 120
(7) 82
(8) $117 740 167
(9) 40 applicants registered interest but did not subsequently provide a full application.
(10) 13
(11) 4
(12) 519
(13) 20
(14) $146 797
(15) 89
(16) 19
(17) 168 written requests
(18) These figures were not collected.
(19) The Redress database was not designed to capture data in this manner. It is relevant to note that applicants often experienced multiple placements but did not necessarily allege abuse in all placements. A search request for abuse alleged at a specific institution can be undertaken, but would be resource intensive.
(20) Information is not available for (a) and (b)
(21) 2 231
(22) A perpetrator of abuse is defined as a person who has been convicted of abuse; and/or subject to an investigation by the Department where allegations of harm have been substantiated; and/or classified by the Department as a 'Person Responsible' or as a person 'Assessed as Causing Significant Harm'.
Of the people referred to the Department for Child Protection (the Department), none are perpetrators of abuse.
14 households, are currently approved with a WWC card and children in their care.
An immediate assessment was undertaken of these carers who had children placed with them and action was taken to ensure no children in placements were at risk of harm. These assessments and actions considered investigations of the allegations, the individual circumstances of each placement, and the best interests of the child, rather than exclusively on the original Redress allegations.
It is noted that some of the Redress allegations were over forty years old, may have been dealt with by the Department at the time of the alleged incident, or involved circumstances where the carer was never made aware of the allegations or given the opportunity to refute them during the Redress process.
(23) No perpetrators of abuse identified through Redress allegations have Working with Children cards. Of the people identified in Redress allegations and referred to the Department, 29 have current Working with Children (WWC) card.
(24) The Department cannot take any action in relation to WWC cards until a charge or convection relevant to the safety of children is reported to the Department.
(25) Three children have been removed from carers (that are currently approved and had children in their care) that have had Redress allegations made against them, due to age and standard of care issues.
(26) Two carers (one household) have had children removed from their care due to age and standard of care issues.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
(2) 20 or 0.35%
(3) Nine applicants could not be contacted, seven relate to locating the beneficiaries of deceased applicants and four are rejected offers.
(4) Level 1 - 859
Level 2 - 1 813
Level 3 - 1 477
Level 4 - 1 063
(Total - 5 212)
(5) Level 1 - 866
Level 2 - 1 818
Level 3 - 1 478
Level 4 - 1 063
(Total - 5 225)
(6) 120
(7) 82
(8) $117 740 167
(9) 40 applicants registered interest but did not subsequently provide a full application.
(10) 13
(11) 4
(12) 519
(13) 20
(14) $146 797
(15) 89
(16) 19
(17) 168 written requests
(18) These figures were not collected.
(19) The Redress database was not designed to capture data in this manner. It is relevant to note that applicants often experienced multiple placements but did not necessarily allege abuse in all placements. A search request for abuse alleged at a specific institution can be undertaken, but would be resource intensive.
(20) Information is not available for (a) and (b)
(21) 2 231
(22) A perpetrator of abuse is defined as a person who has been convicted of abuse; and/or subject to an investigation by the Department where allegations of harm have been substantiated; and/or classified by the Department as a 'Person Responsible' or as a person 'Assessed as Causing Significant Harm'.
Of the people referred to the Department for Child Protection (the Department), none are perpetrators of abuse.
14 households, are currently approved with a WWC card and children in their care.
An immediate assessment was undertaken of these carers who had children placed with them and action was taken to ensure no children in placements were at risk of harm. These assessments and actions considered investigations of the allegations, the individual circumstances of each placement, and the best interests of the child, rather than exclusively on the original Redress allegations.
It is noted that some of the Redress allegations were over forty years old, may have been dealt with by the Department at the time of the alleged incident, or involved circumstances where the carer was never made aware of the allegations or given the opportunity to refute them during the Redress process.
(23) No perpetrators of abuse identified through Redress allegations have Working with Children cards. Of the people identified in Redress allegations and referred to the Department, 29 have current Working with Children (WWC) card.
(24) The Department cannot take any action in relation to WWC cards until a charge or convection relevant to the safety of children is reported to the Department.
(25) Three children have been removed from carers (that are currently approved and had children in their care) that have had Redress allegations made against them, due to age and standard of care issues.
(26) Two carers (one household) have had children removed from their care due to age and standard of care issues.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.