❓ Hon Stephen Dawson questions the Minister for Child Protection regarding non-compliance with court paper submission timelines, the return of a child to their family due to this, and mitigation strategies. The Minister acknowledges the issue and outlines steps being taken to address it.
AnsweredQoN 625Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
CHILDREN
IN CARE — DECISION ON NON-COMPLIANCE
625. Hon STEPHEN DAWSON to the
Minister for Child Protection:
(1) Can the
minister table a copy of the recent Supreme Court decision regarding the
Department for Child Protection and Family Support's non-compliance
with the two-day time frame requirement to submit court papers when a decision
is made to take a child into care?
(2) Has the
child at the centre of the recent Supreme Court decision been returned to their
family as a result of non-compliance with legislation?
(3) How many
interim orders have been prepared to mitigate children at risk being returned
to families?
(4) How many
times has the department failed to submit applications to the Children's
Court within the two-day legislative time frame?
(5) How is the
department managing the effects of this serious legislative breach given the
reduction of in-house legal services?
IN CARE — DECISION ON NON-COMPLIANCE
625. Hon STEPHEN DAWSON to the
Minister for Child Protection:
(1) Can the
minister table a copy of the recent Supreme Court decision regarding the
Department for Child Protection and Family Support's non-compliance
with the two-day time frame requirement to submit court papers when a decision
is made to take a child into care?
(2) Has the
child at the centre of the recent Supreme Court decision been returned to their
family as a result of non-compliance with legislation?
(3) How many
interim orders have been prepared to mitigate children at risk being returned
to families?
(4) How many
times has the department failed to submit applications to the Children's
Court within the two-day legislative time frame?
(5) How is the
department managing the effects of this serious legislative breach given the
reduction of in-house legal services?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of the question.
(1) Yes. I table a copy.
(2) Yes.
(3)–(4)
To date, the Children's Court has not taken issue with late
applications, as child safety and best interests of the child are paramount.
Tolerance for minor slippage on meeting the two-day rule is a practice that has
developed over many years for many systemic and practical reasons. The
Department of Child Protection and Family Support is in the process of
preparing applications for interim orders for affected families to mitigate
children at risk.
(5) The number
of in-house legal staff is a completely separate matter to the breach outlined
by the Supreme Court. This issue has developed over a number of years and the
department is implementing a number of strategies to streamline procedures and
compliance into the future including the implementation of new legal templates
for all urgent applications, which have been distributed to all district staff.
The department has written to all respondent parents affected and has advised
them of their next court mention date so parents are informed of the issues and
can seek legal advice in preparation. The director general has met with the
President of the Children's Court to discuss a number of further
procedural improvements, including electronic filing. The seeking of interim
provisional protection and care orders is done on each affected matter as soon
as possible. The implementation of paralegal support officers in district
offices will assist case workers in the preparation of court documents in order
to streamline the function provided by department lawyers.
[See paper
1559.]
(1) Yes. I table a copy.
(2) Yes.
(3)–(4)
To date, the Children's Court has not taken issue with late
applications, as child safety and best interests of the child are paramount.
Tolerance for minor slippage on meeting the two-day rule is a practice that has
developed over many years for many systemic and practical reasons. The
Department of Child Protection and Family Support is in the process of
preparing applications for interim orders for affected families to mitigate
children at risk.
(5) The number
of in-house legal staff is a completely separate matter to the breach outlined
by the Supreme Court. This issue has developed over a number of years and the
department is implementing a number of strategies to streamline procedures and
compliance into the future including the implementation of new legal templates
for all urgent applications, which have been distributed to all district staff.
The department has written to all respondent parents affected and has advised
them of their next court mention date so parents are informed of the issues and
can seek legal advice in preparation. The director general has met with the
President of the Children's Court to discuss a number of further
procedural improvements, including electronic filing. The seeking of interim
provisional protection and care orders is done on each affected matter as soon
as possible. The implementation of paralegal support officers in district
offices will assist case workers in the preparation of court documents in order
to streamline the function provided by department lawyers.
[See paper
1559.]
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.