*Estimates - QON No. E18-61 O LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA {Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA
ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE
Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Multicultural Affairs
Ref: CSD, Output class 2.3 Inclusion and Participation; BP3, pp. 97, 99; Budget Statements G, pp. 11-12, 17-18
In relation to: Citizenship, Participation and Cohesion - 2016-17 Actions and Outcomes from the ACT Multicultural Framework 2015-2020
1. What are the names of all the community sports engagement programs that target newly arrived communities? a. Which of these programs have a particular emphasis on women and youth? b. What measures will be taken to promote these programs? 2. How are multicultural community leaders in the ACT encouraged to disseminate information about general programs, services and community events to their respective members?
Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:-
1. The Community Services Directorate {CSD) does not administer community sports engagement programs but does fund the Multicultural Youth Service (MYS) to deliver a range of youth engagement programs, including sports, as well as several grant programs that support newly arrived communities to run sports engagement events.
CSD through the Child, Youth and Family Support program and the Office for Multicultural Affairs funds MYS to deliver: • A weekly after school sports program during school term at Kingsford Smith School, Harrison School and Namadgi School targeting migrant and refugee students and is open to their friends and other students. Sports involved are mostly indoor soccer and basketball and both boys and girls attend; • Weekly dance classes at Kingsford Smith School; • An annual Learn to Swim course for recently arrived refugee boys and girls which concludes with a trip to the beach; • Annual community sporting events including Harmony Day football, Refugee Week football and an End-of-Year football knock tournament; and • The annual National Caneball Championships with over 30 teams from every State/Territory and overseas teams participating.
MYS also sponsors community sporting events including Karen, South Sudanese and Sierra Leone sports events by providing trained referees, trophies and catering. Approved Signature:
By
2.
the
The
tennis,
groups Association Cultural community Community
continue Canberra
introductory/junior multicultural
Many
newly Recreation
websites,
and
community
Multicultural
Minister
a.
b.
for
CSD
disseminate
ACT
arrived
youth
Tanzania, to Supported As
All
Advisory Incorporated e 200
organisation program
Power's Royal programs Individual
circulation
basketball,
received
School
annual
Newsletters
for
to
celebrate
Punjabi
well
the
CSD
community
youth
Grants
groups
ACT
meetings
be
Support
Multicultural
Life
sports
community
community
Multicultural
communities
as
grant
supported,
"Girls
Inc
for
Councils Participation
funding
Inc
Burundi, Saving's given information
the
deliverers
and
Sports
programs
to
.
football
Program
to
ACT
children
from
received and programs
Additionally
programs
and
the
(Youth
MYS
including
on
and
their
promote
sporting
their
Youth
games
for
and
Select
Bike"
and
Infrastructure
groups
the
leaders
Partnership
forums.
sports Affairs, Rwanda
across
and
families
e
within
a
and
with sports
of
Group)
established
funding Cultural
News, CALD
Committees
about
(Multicultural)
range
like
Week. are
program,
the
newly
cultural
cricket. Committee
organisations day
various
are
the
engagement,
a
are
numerous
Minister
Aussie
promoted
their
and
fortnightly
particular engagement:
.
community,
from
of
programs,
social received
This
encouraged
Republic
for encouraged
Association;
arrived
with
The
additional
South
Grants diversity
core
program
and
Night
a
inter-generational
the
Hoops
and
media
East
sports
ACT
Rachel
on
sports
Grant
specific
programs,
on funding
East families.
emphasis
participate
have
of
E-News,
Estimates
community Hoops
CSD
services
program
African
Playgroups
are
or
the
South
and
Celebration
to
targeted
platforms
partners,
engagement
to
African
Stephen-Smith
and
Program
Mini strong
which
provides
the
apply.
CSD
use
reach
social
to
(basketball),
the
social
Community
Sudan-Australia
on
and
primary
whether
specifical
Roos.
host
.
a
website
2018-2019
Community
have
representation
programs range
women
ACT
information
to
often
to In
harmony
and
community sports
provides
$25,000
media
an
of
2017-18
the
support
Through
program
Tongan
recently
African
face
means
East
of
this
a
as
l
target
Date:
y
Football
engagement
and
representative
Association
mechanisms
targeting
platforms,
well
.
to
have
African
to
be
$260,000
New
(Kenya,
a
several
youth
sessions.
Language face
of
Australians
Community
the
events
through
community
included
water
competitions
audience.
as
of
been,
promoting
\°f
and
United
in
Sport
through
people
Community
youth.
include
a
Uganda,
\ community
safety
Ministerial
including
emerging
of
to
range ,
saw
and
to
the
table
and
Page
and
the
and
) share
ACT
from
groups
over
CSD
\
Pedal
ACT
of
or
f
2
Inc
of
.
;
2
In
Elizabeth
Ref:
relation
4
3.
1.
5. 2.
CSD,
.
The
What
What What assist
will What Grants)' calendar diverse
each
nursing
Output
Kikkert:
to:
11-12,
Multicultural
the
a
b
ACT
.
year
.
them
training
is
programs cultural,
capitalising
backgrounds?
program
homes What d.
a.
the c.
How b.
in
Multicultural
and
class
for
To
17-18
its
with
current
many
ask
directory
the
2015-16
are
and
SELECT
2.3
Mr
M
religious
LEGISLATIVE
F
to
for
if multicultural can
in
If is how
are
s
OR
Framework
basic
operate?
the
past
Andrew
the
on
the calendar
the Elizabeth
be
the
Inclusion
operation?
mechanisms
Honorary
its
developmental
available
community
the
more
T
is
Minister
selection
calendar
on
ANSWER
Framework
3
delay workplace
COMMITTEE
H
the calendar
that
action
and
years?
E
line
benefits
Wall
Lee
culturally
AUSTR
and
incorporates
linguistic
in
2015-2020
multicultural
Ambassadors
specifically
plan?
plan
MLA
for
MLA,
operation
will
is
criteria
are
members
Participation;
TO
not
training
of
Multicultural
2015-2020
.
(Ch
be
implemented to
status
A
Ms
ON
cultural
being
QUESTION
responsive
available,
LI
events
a
made
Suzanne
ir),
for
ESTIMATES
AN
for
, the
and
Ms
view
of
CV
calendar
promoted
an
will
youth
available
diversity.:....
CA
the
have
promotion
Tara
when
drafting
Honorary
committed
BP3,
Orr
Affairs
are
be
it
towards
PIT
A
'Honorary
ON
the
Cheyne
been
appointed?
MLA
from
there
pp.
currently
S
should
2018-2019
encourage
A
to
calendar?
NOTICE
in
and
SEMBL
L
97,
Objective
the
Ambassador?
supported
culturally
the
of
older
T
still
MLA
to
interview
99;
ERRITOR
the
the community
Ambassador'
ACT
future,
'create
plans
in
(Deputy
Budget
people
Participation
retirement
full
Multicultural
*Estimates
Three
diverse
by
to
operation,
what
an
coaching?
Chair),
the
create
Y
Statements
from
Y
on
from
program
are
line ACT
backgrounds
villages
expect
culturally
M
(Multicultural
an
the
-
the
community?
multicultural
s
Government
and
QON
Caroline
on
reasons
ACT
to
G,
and
line
where
and
see
pp.
No.
how
to
Le
it
E18-612
Couteur
MLA
, Ms
Stephen-Smith:
1.
2.
3.
The
to year
A
Community The The (Multicultural) Multicultural
The In
deliver
workplace http://www n
learning Multicultural
support options
People
complete
the
multicultural
stage
a c. d.
b.
• • • •
ACT
Community
MES
MES
.
including
past
services
from
•
•
•
Job
for
Individual
Preparation
Employee
through
events.
Government
and
program
program
culture
three
flexible
The The The the through
Yes, The
platforms. E list $1,000 with
Mother International
Mother . Mother Service Multicultural interview
communityservices.act
CALO
practice
Festival.
Employment
newsletter
Diwali,
Grants
of
to
digitalised
Office Office
digitalised
answer
Services
there
grants
For the
years,
CIT.
grants
assistance
also
provides young
rights and
backgrounds
to
and
Directorate's
Tongue Tongue Tongue
of
Ministerial Councils
example
Mother
CIT
in
Ramadan,
supports
skills;
assist for
are
for for
customer
job
provides
funding
on
a
to
program
and
recipients
which
provides
Directorate
people
to
Festival. Mother
range
Multicultural Multicultural
still
line
Multicultural
Service
the
applications,
Multicultural
Workplace
and
with
Multilingual Multilingual communities Multilingual
Tongue
responsibilities. with
in
plans
learning.
Member's
a
will
has
of
are
a 2017-18
International
from
service
range
the
website
Language
'Job
job
accessible
(MES)
skills
for
incorporate
.
been
also
to
gov
Annual
funds
Multilingual
searches;
culturally
Club'
the
make
Culture
of
Affairs Affairs
CIT .
including:
CVs
E
: and au/multicultura
able
E
and
Poetry
Poetry Poetry
program.
provided
questions
to
cultural,
at:
newsletter
newsletter
past
Multicultural
offers
Movement
three
and
support
Language
vocational
employee
an
Committees,
to
Mother
is
is
and
three
an Showcase
received received online
access diverse
resumes;
working wo
Poetry
apprenticeships
afternoons
communication
religious
through
online
Communication
are
r
king
the
and
years
and
Language
Walk;
multicultural
training and
rights
(IMLM)
as
education
backgrounds,
l
Showcase;
/programs/grants/participatio
Youth
ACT
funding
funding
to to
calendar
multicultural
calendar
follows:-
at
can
the
and
incorporate digitalise
the
and
multicultural
and
per
Services
received
be
Participation
media
linguistic
Day
2018
of of
week
responsibilities.
and
found
and in
available
will
training
employment
$1,440
$500
calendar
and
the
the
including
National
and
training,
certificate
calendar
be
which
(MYS)
funding
and
workplace;
the
on
to
events
Multicultural
promoted
community
social
to
to
the support
in
to
National
Page
available.
assist
provides:
to
2019.
provide
the
make
with
.
each
of
media
level
2
of
the
3 Signature: Approved
By
the
4
5.
Minister
.
for
Vocational training The training focus foundational The
The of Certificate The seeker their diverse care the If
In
an Health
Framework.
a
December
student
circulation
Honorary
young
Honorary
Commonwealth
establishment
Framework
Multicultural
providers
for
facilities
on
Aged support,
background
through
provided
Multicultural
providing
person
support
I
Pathways.
in
Care
Ambassador.
skills
2017,
Ambassador
to
to
Access
in
migrant
provides
the
to diplomas,
meet
the
Advisory from
in
Diversity
courses,
of
practical
services,
the
aged
in
Select
Government
ACT
the
to
Affairs,
the
ACT
CALO
Office
Vocational
supports
.
guidance
Honorary care
needs This
Program,
Council,
aged
Committee
Framework
including
skills
including
background
bachelor
Minister for
facilities.
will
care
of
Veterans
and
and
is
to
be
Ambassador
as
the Pathways
responsible
including
Certificate
facilities.
aged
experience.
career
study
captured part
Rachel
on
degrees through
people from
is
Estimates
and of
care
a
support.
advice,
student
its
and
Stephen-Smith
the
Seniors
and
its
facilities in
I
for
work
Program
in
CIT
Certificate
selection
the
networks,
skills
aged
graduate
a
2018-2019
international
also of
plan,
culturally
2019
circulated
CIT
to
for
care
is
provide
embed
will
yet
criteria
reporting they
Vocational
II
which
Date:
certificates,
facilities,
in
to
discuss
and
have
Skills
the
student
be
a
good
and
include
number
linguistically
progressed.
Department
against
2
access
for
how
including
Pathways,
how
:I
practice
with
Work
support,
/
many
to
of
to
-,
Page
to
the
a
progress
appoint
a
and
}
strong
into
aged
range
of I
3
job
8'
of
3 *Estimates - QON No. E18-613 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA
ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE
Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Multicultural Affairs
Ref: CSD, Output class 2.3 Inclusion and Participation; BP3, pp. 97, 99; Budget Statements G, pp. 11-12, 17-18
In relation to: the Participation (Multicultural) Grants Program applications for 2018-19
1. What are the selection criteria for successful applicants to the grant program? 2. Do grant applications ever receive funding that is less than the requested amount? 3. Under what circumstances will an application be rejected? 4. Why was the radio program 'Australian Muslim Voice' unsuccessful in their grant application? a. Why was 'Australian Muslim Voice' successful in their 2017-18 grant application?
Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:-
1. The guidelines for the 2018-19 Participation (Multicultural) Grant Program are currently being reviewed and will be available in the near future.
2. Yes, grant applicants may receive less funding than the amount requested in their application. This is made clear in the guidelines and applicants are asked to indicate if the project can only proceed if they receive the full amount of funding sought.
3. An application may be rejected for a number of reasons:
• non-compliance with eligibility requirements outlined in the program guidelines; • overdue reporting obligations for previous grants round or other CSD programs; • does not meet the aim of the program; • limited information provided about the projects; • not addressing the assessment criteria; and • applications that are suitable but are not ranked highly enough to be accommodated with the available funding. 4
Approved Signature .
By
The
Australian $126,173.40
applications.
a. application (Multicultural)
best
Broadcasters Purpose;
the
and
organisations
(Multicultural) In
Eid
Minister assessment
meet
2017-18
:
for
al-Fitr
Inclusion
Exclusions;
i
ng
Muslim
circulation
did
with
for
category).
the
Festival
Grant
Australia
not
panel
Multicultural
aims
Initiatives
$41,890 as
Voice
Grant
demonstrate
possible
and
Program
to
at
assessed
and
Total
Muslim
the
was EPIC
Alignment
Program,
available.
criteria
category.
Select
unsuccessful
benefited
funding
under
Affairs,
(in
all
Voice
alignment
the
applications
of
the
Committee
w
the
Funding
the
Community
In
i Minister
requested
th
received
panel
from
assessing
Multicultural
Funding
grant
in
with
its grant
sought
the
was
Rachel
on
program.
against
grant
grant
for
grant
Priorities.
Radio
appl provided
Estimates
the
to
Community
application
funding
Stephen-Smith
i
funding
cations
funding
the
ensure
Stations
radio
four
to
Australian
2018
of events
broadcasting
for
that
.
priorities
criteria
$1,000
and
Participation,
in -
the
2019
as
the
Multicultural
and
Date:
2017-18
many
Muslim
:
2017-18
towards
as Eligibility;
initiatives
strongly
grant
local
')s::>
Social
Voice's
Participation
Participation
the
multicultural round
/
Funding
Community
1
as
assessed
Harmony
Page
\
other
\
was
2 of as 2 In Elizabeth Ms Ref: relation Stephen-Smith: 4 3. 1. 2 1. CSD, . . The Services The Strait Standards about What Children Quality Quality child {ACT} are In Directorate? How Practitioner, Management How is Each It Reportable Practitioner. Output Kikkert: also managed what to 11-12, regulated a. 2018-19 2017-18 : many many safe regulated -Act Islander is Human both provided Assurance Assurance the complete ways reasons If each and class there services . To 17-18 Those incidents incidents 2013; government Conduct. through The who ACT Legislation Budget Young ask is year services by Policy children SELECT Ms 2.3 Mr LEGISLATIVE FOR sector stronger were funding for answer the the Budget for feedback Andrew will Elizabeth . Inclusion and and for Providers the People (CHaMP}. the provided and and Human THE Care Minister complaints work process ANSWER is the delivery COMMITTEE Improvement Improvement and non-referral? for to was required internal and oversight complaints complaints provided Wall and last Lee the Act AUSTRALIAN young with on stronger and Services introduced non-government are MLA for for ongoing MLA, 10 the Protection Member's and 2008, Participation; providers TO Community required that years? to Disability, investigating people quality of (Chair) for investigation Ms ON demonstrate and QUESTION have oversight have Committee Committee? and human Registrar were funding Suzanne funding ESTIMATES on , Community question involved and Ms of to been been to 7 not Children the CAPITAL services comply Services Tara June reduce Disability BP3, service for of under Orr incidents for referred made referred ASSEMBLY Community of ON and human Cheyne the 2018 the MLA with is pp complains 2018-2019 with and and as a NOTICE delivery the Housing Directorate . Child providers? about maintain establishment 97, 99; 97, review follows:- Child specifically to to to and TERRITORY services MLA eliminate Youth Disability other provide the the and Child Services complex and (Deputy being Providers of Budget committee, Child compliance Youth legislation, *Estimates Aboriginal delivery. Youth Complaints and powers Services restrictive include undertaken and of Directorate's Chair), Statements complaints Protection Youth an National Protection Youth Service to ACT what the including Act with and Ms Protection - the Handling pract QON provision Caroline Senior 1991, Protection Torres within specific are and Law Senior made G, providers . services i ces the pp. No. . and the Le of E18-614 Couteur MLA, 12-13 16-17 13-14 17 14-15 15-16 2. - 18 Assurance Committee Better Strait Budget Better More Better More Protection The education The incidents Investigation The Engagement did (CYPS) • • • • • • • Jul 11 not 8 6 2 • 8 6 3 6 6 3 2 6 9 6 9 3 9 6 9 8 3 4 5 2 4 5 • • Focus steps following support support Complaint Islander Assessment Information Discussion Findings Possible Depending support support Government- Measure complaints record Disability 98/current/pdf/1991 Children Community 19/current/pdf/2008-19.pdf http://www. and Aug are of 14 services. is 4 9 6 for for children on investigation when Improvement when and directions investigated of and table complaints families families received with education internal on Sept and of gathering Client Services recommendations 11 13 10 11 it it unit Stronger the information provides and Housing matters matters complainant legislation Young and and legislation, regarding for Services young CSD Oct 14 16 Committee for 7 6 5 3 and Act under data inclusion inclusion oversight action - - People Providers complaints the Children Office - both 98.pdf 1991: people guidance .act.gov.a on gathered, Nov team, the number 15 11 CYPS 6 6 6 7 re: under review a internal of Act - - of central http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/a/1991- relevant involved Child matters Review and Senior human National each formerly 2008: Dec for is relevant u/a/2013-18/ Young 4 4 3 5 7 7 5 7 6 7 6 5 6 of options and policies described and Practitioner providers database. complaints of month with for services http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/a/2008- legislation Youth Aboriginal People ext Jan Law the 3 8 8 8 9 3 4 5 2 investigation legislation Child are and _ ernal since Protection Child (ACT) in delivery of available. Death cu procedures and CHaMP. Feb recorded 13 10 14 guided disability, and complaints rre July and -Act Youth nt/pdf Torres Review (external): 2012. Youth Quality Mar 12 11 by External 2013 8 7 6 8 8 by /2013-18. care the Prior are the Protection Apr principles 10 and 2017-18 9 as Budget Community complaints to follows: • • this protection, pdf May 12 23 Services date, of Page 2018-19 Budget CHaMP. and CYPS Jun • • • 23 2 3 1 and of 3 Total 120 134 85 69 71 73 Approved Signature: By 3. the The from complaints and complaints December Responding Minister for Quality, Improvement this circulation for period 2016 to review to Complaints Disability, Children Disability, the complaints and forward. to Quality . Committee's It June the was and Select Of and established 2018. is not the Regulation Complaints Committee Terms and a complaints part Youth, in of of (QCR) this Reference the Team on above, Minister current Child Estimates branch in QCR and 15 or iteration Rachel is were role. Youth for an 2018 further internal escalated Stephen-Smith - in Protection 2019 December Date: review, escalation as Quality complex between 2016 point and Assurance Page for data 3 CSD of is 3 *Estimates - QON No. E18-615 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Multicultural Affairs Ref: CSD, Output class 2.3 Inclusion and Participation; BP3, pp. 97, 99; Budget Statements G, pp. 11-12, 17-18 In relation to: Relationship manager visits to funded services 1. Which services have been assigned visits from a Relationship Manager during the year 2017-18? 2. How often does a Relationship Manager visit each of these services? 3. To whom does a Relationship Manager report to for subsequent discussion and review of these visits? a. Which services no longer require a visit (as anticipated by the 2018-19 target) owing to being transferred from Service Funding Agreement to Deeds of Grant? Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:- 1. During the 2017-18 financial year a total of 36 organisations were visited, including: 1) Australian Capital Territory Council of Social Service Inc; 2) ACT Playgroups Association Inc; 3) Anglicare NSW South NSW West and ACT; 4) Barnardos Australia; 5) Belconnen Community Service Inc; 6) Canberra Police and Community Youth Club; 7) Canberra Rape Crisis Centre; 8) Care Inc; 9) Companion House; 10) Conflict Resolution Service; 11) Domestic Violence Crisis Service; 12) Everyman Australia; 13) Families ACT; 14) Girl Guides Association; 15) Gugan Gulwan Youth Aboriginal Corporation; 16) Lighthouse Business Innovation Centre; 2 3 . . The year. are ensuring outcomes productive available possible has Relationship Relationship 3a. arranged 22} 33} 23} 28} 34} 24} 30} 29} 20} 35} 25} 31} 26} 21} 36} 32} 17} 27} an 18} 19} arrangement 2014. Looking role For idea The Valley The Tuggeranong Volunteering Society Tuggeranong Youth Woden Queanbeyan YWCA Majura Manuka Menslink; Relationships Migrant Rotary Northside 4} UnitingCare Prisoners 5} 1) 7} 2) 3} 8) 9) 10) 6} 11) 12) outcomes of compliance example, as Organisations of working a to Awards ACT Community appropriate Community Girl Prisoners Lifeline Lone Trustee Majura Families National Smith Noah's forward Managers Managers service Relationship as Coalition discuss Canberra; FM Club Women's of Community needed, Guides and Playgroups Occasional Fathers in Aid; St Community Broadcasters; Family; for if Ark Women's Canberra; relationship ACT line of ofthe Kippax; visits Vincent ACT; to an Refugee Association with Multilingual and Community Link Australia Aid; with our Canberra; aim are 2018-19, Association; Resource of organisation Services with Radio to include: Incorporated; which and Association; Group; Contact Manager as contracting of the community. Salvation the visit supported to Service; Child Association; Community needed de the Settlement Group; visit ACT 2XX; Service; Relationship can Canberra the Paul; is #1; a for intent Centre; Care Centre; Arts ACT; fostered . total an result is service. . Army Prevention requires to organisation arrangements by Association; Association; of of provide their Houses and Services in the Property 17 . The Manager, multiple Region; services additional red respective of productive support and of tape Child once Trust; the with service Centre; the are reduction Abuse support, ACT; per to Executive the funded team an working year. visits aim organisation and will is initiative by of However over Neglect Directors running make relationship delivering a recurrent the themselves implemented course service ACT to an to ensure event, the discuss Inc; grant assists Page of best visits the or a 2 the in of in 3 Approved Signature: By the Minister for circulation 14) 15) 16) 13) 17) for Tuggeranong Scout Valley Youth Warehouse Community to Association Coalition FM the Broadcasters Circus; Select Services Link of of of the Committee and Australia; Community and ACT. ; Social \ on Inclusion, Houses Estimates and Minister 2018-2019 Centre; Rachel Date : Stephen-Smith Page 3 of 3 pilot pilot ln ln Ms Ms In In Ref: Ref: Elizabeth Elizabeth relation relation relation relation Stephen-Smith 2. 2. 1. 1. 2. 2. 1. 1. Community Community for for evaluation evaluation The The Broader Broader different different families the the Islander Islander Family Family In In the-home the-home differ differ Up, Up, arise arise In In currently currently are are protection protection successful successful introduce introduce principles principles children children Early Early family family Kikkert: Kikkert: the the the the to: to: to: to: pilot pilot Budget Budget ongoing ongoing the the b. b. a. a. Functional Functional described described out out data data The The from from 2018-19 2018-19 The The hearings hearings Group Group group group . . experts experts The The families What What Indigenous Indigenous program program access access children children for for This This remaining remaining Services, Services, models models of of focussed focussed family family : : newly newly behind behind support To To from from newly newly undertaken way way Paper Paper system? system? the the family family The The care care functional functional delivery delivery is is conferencing conferencing Conferences Conferences ask ask other other by by SELECT SELECT Family Family budget, budget, Ms Ms Mr Mr to to one one to to LEGISLATIVE LEGISLATIVE FOR FOR in in the the , , of of the the answer answer announced announced of of and and group group and and in in to to announced announced Marymead Marymead 3, 3, the the this this recognition recognition it it engage engage Andrew Andrew '. '. Children Children Elizabeth Elizabeth their their group group on on functional functional all all support support families. families. in in proposed proposed sound sound all all pp. pp. family family On On in of of protection protection by by TH Minister Minister the the - Therapy- program program Aboriginal Aboriginal aspects aspects . . ANSWER ANSWER families families the-home the-home family family COMMITTEE COMMITTEE the the the the conferencing conferencing Family Family 95-97, 95-97, own own to to whom? whom? conferencing conferencing E E Wall Wall with with home. home. like like group group will will the the ACT ACT Lee Lee and and surface AU which which What What functional functional situation, situation, in in functional functional therapy therapy of of by by family family of of for for they they MLA MLA Group Group MLA, MLA, Member's Member's remain remain families, families, 99-100; 99-100; in in STR their their will will Youth, Youth, Government Government matters the the Child Child Marymead? Marymead? the the In In and and TO TO conferencing conferencing support support the the Disability, Disability, target target plans plans , , (Chair), (Chair), the the be be could could this this Ms Ms A overrepresentation overrepresentation ON ON budget budget therapy therapy chi QUESTION QUESTION to to ACT ACT Torres Torres Conferencing. Conferencing. LIAN LIAN pilot Welfa conside focused focused Output Output are are family family Suzanne Suzanne hearings, hearings, family family Budget Budget all all to to l sounds sounds . . d d ESTIMATES ESTIMATES have have different different What What solve solve question question programs programs who who protection protection Ms Ms , , experts experts let let families families like like r Children Children submission Strait Strait committed committed e e program program C Tara Tara fam therapy therapy been been r therapy therapy Class Class (FFT could could on on APITAL APITAL pilot pilot ed ed Statements Statements many many Orr Orr plans plans family family similar similar ASSEMBLY ASSEMBLY Ms Ms ON ON i as as Aboriginal Aboriginal Cheyne Cheyne lies lies Islander Islander families. families. in in - is is who who MLA MLA discussed discussed CW) CW) are are At At 3.3 3.3 appear appear 2018-2019 2018-2019 Pappas Pappas further further benefit benefit their their as as and and system, system, have have of of NOTICE NOTICE make make was was pilot pilot group group this this pilot pilot to to . . Child Child currently currently follows:- come come the the of of $1.44m $1.44m and and How How TERRITORY TERRITORY MLA MLA Youth Youth the the own own been been families, families, described described time time Aboriginal Aboriginal G, G, and and FFT positive, positive, and and most most their their called called data data from from and and the the conferencing, conferencing, and and or or including including home-based home-based does does (Deputy (Deputy into into pp - children'. children'. CW CW the the the the prior discussed discussed made made funding funding . . PAIRup PAIRup Torres Torres *Estimates *Estimates being being own own is is Youth Youth common common 19-20 19-20 it? it? contact contact this this the the available available specifically specifically continuation continuation yet yet continuation continuation with with i a a ty ty and and Chair) decisions. decisions. to to 'family 'family OzChild OzChild 'a 'a out out offered offered its its for for Strait Strait Protection Protection proposal proposal over over This This introduce introduce particularly particularly 18 18 Torres Torres or or success success with with prog complaints complaints targets targets of of , , allocation allocation Ms Ms out out and and made made - pilot pilot home home four four Islander Islander based based targets targets QON QON to to program program r the the Caroline Caroline am, am, of of Families Families Strait Strait of of of of are are Canberra Canberra and and years years is is Services; Services; 21 21 to to this this the the child child the the care. care. Pair Pair .. No very very of of . . that that the the in Le Le for for . . E18-616 E18-616 Couteur Couteur MLA, MLA, Signature: Approved By the A The to The support a. b. while of being Families Minister Step home parents for jurisdictions The The The families Strategy will specific or work and service. managers and model in intensively includes preservation up Karinya provides In Uniting Family PAIRup PAIRup decreasing removed. the regard drug circulation Up to be FFT-CW Intensive reducing Family Uniting and with for care with 12-18 for family's with in evaluated Based Children and needs, House is proposal whose Disability, counselling in introduced in the to Our children system more link families with home Preservation home young Children alcohol families FFT-CW will months. on ACT and intensive the Program to kids. Family families home offers and babies the akin the commence the and and by over and support work is support and children Children in supports applicability focused programs family Marymead a to Select improves known to using Based and Families their The both to the - number might young with and representation negativity toward parents, early support Program Families. Children Directorate programs. for a the own for Family Committee {0-4 Program and other to on in residential parents be intervention people . up offers family up the the of Homebuilders family supporting homes, years). has at Youth, as of to a family and to offers locally Preservation second risk child and child well models three an 15-20 in These is to aged dynamics, ( restoration will dysfunctional of of home a early on Families Minister and as or connect or protection preservation flexible safety these based coming months continue programs face Estimates half at birth hours young Aboriginal of programs outreach intervention an support model. support of to families focused services. Program. communication to program alternative support Rachel with . per 2018. into person face for Children 17 system, to patterns and 2018-2019 week. Children families and education, are based programs years, and out for consider outreach, This in Stephen preservation supports in tailors being delivered vulnerable Children focus of reunification statutory Torres the and the home-like first suppo at home of Date: involved and family risk evidence A returned and Families behaviour. - including support and Smith introduction mental mentoring Strait Step available r Families and care. of t by services. is supportiveness program families service entering home to environment, Up Karinya Families with Islander services to ACT's health Karinya provide from home the for each staff under their and to delivered The in Page Our Intensive of for other case House the sustain after services the can families that work support the family's House phone pilot Kids out 2 ACT. for of 2 *Estimates - QON No. E18-617 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth Ref: Community Services, Children and Youth, Output Class 3.3 Child and Youth Protection Services; Budget Paper 3, pp. 95-97, 99-100; Budget Statements G, pp. 19-20 In relation to: The handling of complaints and appeals with regards to care and protection decisions 1. It has come to our attention that when carers are told that a care and protection placement decision is not subject to further internal review, they are told that they may direct 'any concerns regarding [the] decision ... to ... the Children and Young People Commissioner'. In hearings, however, Ms Griffiths-Cook said, 'I am unsure, I guess, why the recommendation has been made for referral to us because there is very little we can do for family members' who have concerns about care and placement decisions. She did acknowledge that her office does take a 'significant number of enquiries, particularly from parents and often grandparents, in response to care and protection actions'. If the Children and Young People Commissioner is not legislatively tasked to handle these complaints, where are parents/carers told they can take their concerns to her office? 2. In the hearings, Ms Pappas noted that, in relation to residence decisions and contact provisions, those with concerns have the opportunity 'to make an application [to the Children's Court] to amend an order and to seek a contact provision', and she further stated that 'there is no cost associated'. This option of making an application to the Children's Court for an amendment makes no appearance in the Glanfield Inquiry, which instead notes the financial obstacle of securing 'judicial review' (p. 76). Can you please clarify specifically which CYPS decisions (including decisions of the director-general) can be appealed to the Children's Court, without cost, who can make such an appeal, and the exact process that needs to be followed? a. To our knowledge, letters of decision provided to parents/carers do not include notification of this opportunity to appeal a decision by application to the Children's Court but rather suggest that concerns may be raised with the Children and Young People Commissioner and that legal advice may be sought. Why is this option not made explicit in such letters? b. Where would a parent/carer with concerns currently go to learn the details of this option? c. In relation to making application for amendment to the Children's Court, Ms Pappas in the hearing said, 'It does not happen that often . It is not a pathway that people will pick or choose to use'. What specific obstacles cause this pathway to be rarely used? Is lack of awareness one of those obstacles? 3. Are there CYPS decisions that can only be contested in the Supreme Court, as noted in the Glanfield Inquiry (p. 76)? a. If so, has the CSD ever requested that their court costs in such a situation be reimbursed by a complainant? 4. Under what circumstances are reasons for a decision in regards to a placement or as part of a care plan of a child or young person provided to their parents and carers? Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:- 1. Children, Youth and Families (CYF) receive requests from the Public Advocate and the Children and Young People Commissioner (CYPC) for information regarding concerns that have been raised about Child and Youth Protection Services' (CYPS) services, conduct and decision making. The CYPCinvestigates the matter and provides findings and recommendations to CYF for consideration. For specific information about the powers, process and purpose of the CYPC, please contact the Human Rights Commission or view information about their services at http://hrc.act.gov.au/. In addition to providing contact details for the CYPC, CYF also provides contact details for the Public Advocate as an alternative for pursuing concerns regarding CYPS.The Public Advocate may request information regarding child protection matters and has authority under the Children and Young People Act 2008 to make an application to amend a care and protection order or seek an initial care and protection order. Section 704 of the CYP Act states that if the Public Advocate makes an application to the Court under the care and protection chapters, the Court must grant the Public Advocate leave to join the proceeding as a party. In recognition of the need to improve information available to foster and kinship carers, CYPS has partnered with ACT Together to develop a comprehensive Carer Handbook. The purpose of the handbook is to provide a single source of useful information about the important role of carers in supporting children and young people in care. Content has been informed through direct consultation with foster and kinship carers, as well as carer advocacy groups and children and young people. 2. Any party impacted by a decision of the Director-General, or her delegates, may make an application to the Children's Court to amend, extend or revoke a Care and Protection Order. The grounds and criteria for such applications are outlined in the Children and Young People Act 2008. There are no costs associated with lodging an application with the Children's Court. a. CYPS does not provide legal advice to families regarding taking legal action. The advice provided to families who are dissatisfied with a decision made by CYPSis to seek advocacy and/ or professional legal advice regarding their options for legal recourse. b. Advice regarding legal recourse should be sought from a legal professional. Birth families and carers can also seek support and advocacy from the Australian Red Cross Birth Family Advocacy Support Service, for birth families or Carers ACT, for carers. c. It is difficult to answer a question regarding the reasons families opt to not pursue a review avenue as this data is not collected. The majority of CYPSfamilies have access Page 2 of 4 to legal advice and legal representation during care proceedings and it is expected that their solicitor will provide appropriate legal advice regarding interactions with CYPS. 3. As per page 76 of the Glanfield Review, any decision made under an enactment can be reviewed in the Supreme Court under the Administrative Decisions Judicial Review Act 1989 (ADJR Act). This includes decisions made under the Children and Young People Act 2008 (CYP Act) which meet the requirements of the ADJR Act. The CYP Act does not specifically provide that there are a unique set of decisions which can only be contested in the Supreme Court. The ADJR Act provides a general right to individuals to seek review of any administrative decisions made under ACT law (with a few stated exceptions). For further information as to the circumstances in which an application under the ADJR Act might be made, please refer to sections 5, 6 and 7 of the ADJR Act which set out the grounds upon which an application may be made. The CYP Act also specifically provides a right of review of certain decisions by the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (please see section 839B of the CYP Act) without the need to commence proceedings in the Supreme Court. CYPSprovides an information sheet to all clients, which includes children and young people, parents, families and carers, which outlines the type of decisions made by Child and Youth Protection Services (CYPS)that are subject to review and how to commence the review process. This information sheet is provided in accordance with section 839A of the CYP Act and is titled 'About Reviewable Decisions'. This document can be found on the website www.communityservices.act.gov.au . a. There is no historical data in relation to previous applications of this nature. In light of this, CYF is not in a position to state if this has ever occurred. 4. All changes to a Care Plan must be completed as per s457 of the Children and Young People's Act 2008 with all necessary consultation undertaken before the plan is decided and finalised. The Child and Youth Protection Services Practice Standards launched in August 2017 note the Community Services Directorate's commitment to transparent practice and ensuring timely and effective communication surrounding decision making. CYPSis committed to providing client focused services, and ensuring that client rights and responsibilities are upheld. Everyone involved has a right to an explanation of decisions made by CYPSand to ask for a review of the decision should they wish. CYPSstaff consider appropriate supports for carers and family members involved in any placement change and ensure that their views are recorded Carers, parents, and other relevant stakeholders are invited to become members of declared care teams. Care teams are used to discuss issues and make shared decisions in regards to children and young people. Information is able to be shared freely in care teams, and includes understanding why and how decisions are made. These meetings are also used.to check the progress of plans over time, to ensure they are meeting the current and future needs of the child or young person. Page 3 of 4 Signature: Approved By the The collaboratively (i.e. Minister for 'Working all circulation services for Disability, Together and involved to actively the Children for Select with Kids' engage the Committee and publication child in Youth, consultation or young on Minister also Estimates person) addresses with Rachel not 2018-2019 but the Stephen-Smith only also Directorate's the 'all established relevant need people'. Care Page to work Team 4 of 4 *Estimates - QON No. E18-618 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY SELECTCOMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth Ref: Community Services, Children and Youth, Output Class 3.3 Child and Youth Protection Services; Budget Paper 3, pp. 95-97, 99-100; Budget Statements G, pp. 19-20 In relation to: Adoption and permanency 1. Budget Statements G {p. 20) indicates that the 2017-18 target for number of permanency placements was 25, with only 10 as the estimated outcome. How many of these estimated outcomes are predicted to be enduring parental responsibility {EPR), and how are predicted to be adoption? a. Of those estimated to be adoptions, how many are intercountry, and how many are domestic? b. Of domestic adoptions, how many are local, and how many are known? 2. How many applications for permanency placements are currently awaiting finalisation in the ACT? a. How many of these are EPR, and how many are adoptions? b. Of those that are adoptions, how many are intercountry, and how many are domestic? c. Of domestic adoptions, how many are local, and how many are known? 3. Some Australian jurisdictions are discussing shifting responsibility for adoption finalisation from the Magistrates Court to the Children's Court. What discussions on this matter have occurred within the Community Services Directorate? Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:- 1. As of 30 June 2018, the number of permanency placements is 16. Of these, nine are an Enduring Parental Responsibility Order and seven are Adoptions.1 a. There were five domestic adoptions finalised in 2017-18 and two intercountry adoptions finalised in 2017-18. b. There is zero local adoptions and five known adoptions finalised in 2017-18. 1 It should be noted that adoptions are counted in the State or Territory that the child resides, not the State or Territory that the Child Protection Order was made in. There were 6 children referred to other States for adoption in 2017-18. Approved Signature: By 2. 3. the As The being underway Minister at for c. a. b. ACT 1 progressed. circulation July Of stages Of currently permanency 'known', lntercountry Supreme for in the the 2018, regards Disability, 36, of permanency that permanency 12 36 to Court 18 intercountry the permanency to order, adoptions of is, Children changing these has they Select EPR assessments jurisdiction are are assessment Committee are or and the children adoptions placements for adoption, not Youth, legal an counted of EPR. referred in jurisdiction and adoptions on Minister being out has The for Estimates a in of decision yet children to remaining progressed the home in to Rachel in for response response be the 2018-2019 care. on decision in determined. ACT. Stephen-Smith 18 out the . are to of to most There Date: making question home 2a, currently appropriate all are care of in tC, no 2. these the in f discussions are There the l ACT. Page currently \ are type initial ' are g- 2 of of 2 *Estimates - QON No. E18-619 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE A USTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth Ref: Community Services, Children and Youth, Output Class 3.3 Child and Youth Protection Services; Budget Paper 3, pp. 95-97, 99-100; Budget Statements G, pp . 19-20 In relation to: Parent/carer concerns with a CYPScaseworker 'Working Together for Kids' notes that disliking a caseworker is, by itself, not sufficient grounds to request a new caseworker. If a birth parent were to lose a child whilst that child was in the oversight of a certain caseworker, would that history alone be sufficient grounds to request a new caseworker for any other of the parent's children in care? Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:- lt is recommended that family members who are experiencing challenges with their case worker, or any other aspect of their engagement with Child and Youth Protection Services (CYPS), contact an advocacy service such as the Red Cross Birth Family Advocacy Support Service. This service has been engaged as part of A Step Up for Our Kids to assist families to manage their relationship with CYPSas effectively as possible. Guide 4 of the 'Working Together for Kids' booklets identifies that where there is information that a case worker has engaged in unprofessional, unethical or ill-informed conduct then it is appropriate for a complaint to be lodged. That complaint would be thoroughly investigated in the context of all available information. Approved for circulation to the Select Committee on Estimates 2018-2019 Signature: Date: I "'2 l 7 ' \ Y By the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth, Minister Rachel Stephen-Smith *Estimates - QON No. E18-620 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth Ref: Community Services, Children and Youth, Output Class 3.3 Child and Youth Protection Services; Budget Paper 3, pp. 95-97, 99-100; Budget Statements G, pp . 19-20 In relation to: ACT Government-funded support for grandparent carers: 1. We understand that funding for the Marymead-sponsored Grandparents Group, which supports Canberrans caring for grandchildren, has been dramatically cut, and these grandparents have been told to find their support through ACT Together. a. In addition to carers with children subject to ACT Care and Protection Orders, does ACT Together provide support to grandparents with children under Family Court Orders or in informal family arrangements? b. If no, where exactly can such grandparent carers go to find the support that is available to other carers through ACT Together? Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:- Marymead continues to receive a grant to deliver a support program and information group for grandparents who are preparing to be, or who are the primary carer for their grandchild/ren aged Oto 18 years. This funding will enable the Marymead Grandparent Group to continue to meet and foster social connections. a. Under A Step Up for Our Kids, the ACT Government's five-year out of home care reform strategy, ACT Together provides support to foster and kinship carers, including grandparents caring for children on short and long-term Care and Protection Orders. b. It is not the case that members of Marymead's Grandparents Group have been advised solely to seek support from ACT Together. They have been provided with information about a range of supports that are available to formal and informal carers of children in the ACT. This includes Carers ACT, which is funded by both the Australian and ACT governments to provide a wide range of supports to carers of all kinds, including grandparent carers providing informal care to children. Other organisations also provide case management services and supports within the Canberra community, including the Child and Family Centres in Gungahlin, Tuggeranong and West Belconnen, which offer a range of group programs and one-on-one support. Signature: Approved By the The impact action carers Minister for ACT in plan circulation they Government, for the under make Canberra Disability, Children Disability, to the in the people's ACT in community, Select partnership Carers lives Committee and Strategy and including Youth, with the Carers 2018-2028. on broader Minister grandparents, Estimates ACT, community. Rachel This is currently 2018-2019 Strategy acknowledging Stephen-Smith Date: developing will better the the support positive Page first 2 of 2 *Estimates - QON No. E18-621 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth Ref: Community Services, Children and Youth, Output Class 3.3 Child and Youth Protection Services; Budget Paper 3, pp. 95-97, 99-100; Budget Statements G, pp. 19-20 In relation to: operational lockdowns at Bimberi Youth Justice Centre 1. The occurrence of operational lockdowns at Bimberi Youth Justice Centre keeps increasing, from 4 in the second half of 2016 to 30 in the first half of 2017 to 95 in the second half of 2017, with another 61 occurring in just the first 15 weeks of this year. a. No extra funding for staff has been included in this year's budget. What steps is the government taking to make sure that lack of staff is not resulting in frequent lockdowns? b. When do you predict that the number of lockdowns will start decreasing? c. How many operational lockdowns occurred at Bimberi during the period January June 2018? Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member1 s question is as follows:- la. During 2017-18, significant recruitment was undertaken with 31 new youth workers recruited to Bimberi Youth Justice Centre. Seven new youth workers commenced their induction in September 2017, 12 commenced their induction in March 2018 and further 12 commenced their induction in May 2018. Since 14 May 2018, when new youth workers became operational, there has been one, one hour operational lockdown at Bimberi. lb. Refer to question l(a). le. A total of 84 operational lockdowns occurred for the period 1 January 2018 to 30 June 2018. Approved for circulation to the Select Committee on Estimates 2018-2019 Signature: I Date: By the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth, Minister Rachel Stephen-Smith *Estimates - QON No. E 18-622 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth Ref: Community Services, Children and Youth, Output Class 3.3 Child and Youth Protection Services; Budget Paper 3, pp. 95-97, 99-100; Budget Statements G, pp. 19-20 '---- In relation to: the Blueprint for Youth Justice Taskforce 1. The Community Services Directorate established a task force in 2017 to review the Blueprint.for Youth Justice and to set directions for the next five years of the strategy. What is the current status of the taskforce? a. Has a review been undertaken of the previous 5 years and what were the results of the review? b. What directions have been set by the task force for the next five years of the strategy? c. What concerns or issues were raised by the taskforce in relation to the strategy? 2. The development of the Blueprint was informed by a number of professionals and community leaders, including specialists in child and adolescent psychology. a. Did any child and adolescent psychology specialists participate at the workshop on 3 May? b. If not, why were they not included as part of the workshop in reviewing the Blueprint, or in previous workshops? 3. Was there any discussion in the workshop on addressing the specific risk factor of Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASO) and youth in contact with the justice system? a. If so, what was the nature of the discussion, and what are the next steps to be taken on this issue? b. If not, when will the issue of FASO and youth justice be discussed and a plan implemented to address the associated risks? 4. The Community Services Directorate will commission a discussion paper on interventions for young people in early adolescence at risk of offending behaviour. What is the current status of the discussion paper, and when will it be published? Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:- 1. The Blueprint for Youth Justice Taskforce (the Taskforce) was established in August 2017 to monitor progress, identify emerging issues and establish the direction for the next five years of the Blueprint for Youth Justice in the ACT 2012-22 (the Blueprint). The Taskforce met on seven occasions in 2017-18. The Taskforce developed the mid-term progress report on the Blueprint, which was tabled in the ACT Legislative Assembly in March 2018. In May and July 2018 the Taskforce participated in two half-day workshops on key themes to assist the development of advice to the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth on focus areas for future work under the Blueprint. 2. a. b. Communiques http c. he a. b. act Organisations Youth Commission, : Community Community fields Taskforce government Youth Children Taskforce's Development Community leaders determining community, During Panel, progress The youth the The ce the Torres Some The stage http the on criminal enhancing support progress Children focus detention It pages //www is pages in ACT number next anticipated Taskforce : mid-term Taskforce //www of of Justice areas Coalition, of justice a the 31 2011-12, Strait . communityserv time-limited child Legislative the and offending, the stage report. and report 41 to has and released act work, Safety Services for . 41 as of with the Blueprint. and themes communityservices Young the Islander Youth Implementation system and Directorate. been represented . progress has has implementing of young well and future that and Woden as future Community 42. the different in adolescent identified identified Directorate, the for Assembly established supporting by are as and People in response the Directorate, the identified panel has young Blueprint. people work. 2018 specialists the young These strategic focus being report i Community ces representatives summary Taskforce significantly Taskforce Co-chairs at areas comprising Commissioner . on act.gov people, key a Services of coming stronger the themes psychology, in considered people to Taskforce on number young to focus and with the These March . direction the themes act of in led 3 the date can will May . expertise disability, Chief . Blueprint, au/ocyfs/you Jodie Services, gov preventing emerging a can the areas with into were declined Blueprint people Directorate, range are throughcare be experts include provide 2018 of . 2018 sought from au/ocyfs/youth/the workshop. be to by Minister, found emerging contact among of Griffiths-Cook, disability and identified for identified explore accessed . the the of in Overall, as Education workshop are the within the Mark challenges over improving with advice representatives has early advice intergenerational at: appropriate Taskforce Blueprint t many providing Aboriginal with, h/the next Aboriginal Treasury been practices and/or in the challenges experience Collis, in the adolescence at: in the setting to from the five other or previous the were: Directorate, the blueprint completed existing ACT outcomes progress identified was escalating as mid-term Deputy mental expertise years mid-term and a for and Minister in it Legal areas. priorities blueprint Public Youth the being to develops youth from and the Economic Torres five strategic of be transmission at ACT Director-General, report health Services, for qualifications in for next the Advocate and Justice The addressed through, risk developed, Justice community progress years. and for justice. progress the Human for Aboriginal youth Strait for Blueprint. advice was of stage current Disability; found concerns input mid-term framework. the offending, The Advisory and youth PCYC, Page tabled Islander the report and next justice Rights of report of over to on full that the and in ACT and the 2 in justi of in the on in 3 t Approved Signature: By 3 4. the . justice The The a. explored for on: b areas papers Minister . young for justice The preventing The the Government sector or assessments 10 Taskforce issue for FASD. July system circulation will youth 3 issue for by the of May people for sector 2018, be the enhancing The Disability, Blueprint. of justice a made is was 2018 the greater Taskforce Foetal currently and Disability issue in in responds to identified intergenerational conjunction early Taskforce publicly the system screening of Alcohol support Children understanding Select disability adolescence considering in Justice to the was available in young workshop Spectrum Committee tools the for with and mid-term raised Strategy was young Terms Youth, people transmission were discussion and in at of discussed at 2018, risk did Disorder disability people of . the providing all progress on Minister with not Reference of raised Estimates 10 as offending. on focus with disability, July in part , of (FASD) the increased report. more in feedback Rachel criminal 2018 disability of specifically relation development for 2018-2019 the and detail It the workshop. including Stephen-Smith is Taskforce's offending staff young on anticipated Taskforce to in at two Date: improving on contact Taskforce training, people of FASD the draft The the and advice and issue l-"1 with . that need research ACT disability interventions in how workshop further / contact of these the on 7 across Page the disability focus \ \ youth papers youth l' 3 with the on of 3 Ms In 1. Ref: Elizabeth Signature: Approved By relation Stephen with cannot Part protection her the Community frustration a. a. b Minister b 16.4 Bimberi . Kikkert: . to: Budget for include - for Some People Act? commencement protection policy Why restrictive I be Royal No See Smith have of The circulation established? place young funding the Services, (a) for does being Commission elements To : direction provision asked Paper Act that detainees.) previous. The Children in Disability, ask people the practices. SELECT Mr Ms 2008, LEGISLATIVE FOR provisions the the has she answer CSD 3, the Andrew Elizabeth to Children ACT ACT. only . pp. been had of of This the of and THE . do Minister and ANSWER therapeutic COMMITTEE into therapeutic not Children 95-97, the other to no Yet not Select This work allotted Young Wall the of Lee the currently and A Senior such Institutional in the align USTRALI work ACT for MLA option. MLA, December will 99-100; Member's Committee Youth, People Act and place TO in Disability, with Human Practitioner also (Chair), protection, will protections Ms this to ON have QUESTION Youth (And Output to the current align Suzanne commence consider Budget Act ESTIMATES Responses A budget which last question a Ms Rights N , on by outlines therapeutic Minister Children with CA Tara year, Class Estimates definition, Bi/12018 as Statements Orr places she for PIT ASSEMBLY recent Commission ON envisaged best Cheyne best in MLA is Canberra's to such could 3.3 the 2018-2019 A Rachel and as 2018-19. NOTICE Child in practice, T L Child recommendations practise for follows:- protection establishment the 2018 a MLA a Youth send space. E therapeutic G, reducing Sexual in Stephen ACT RRITORY and to - (Deputy pp the 2019 chief an current in review . *Estimates When Youth Date: 19-20 11-year Children trauma Abuse place magistrate - and Smith Chair), of protection knowledge the can Protection eliminating as and a - ~ informed made old and therapeutic therapeutic described we M - the s offender, I QON expressed Caroline expect Young 7 by proposed \ place Services; and the I support No f' in it Le the . to E18-623 Couteur MLA, *Estimates - QON No. E18-624 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITOR Y SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth Ref: Community Services, Children and Youth, Output Class 3.3 Child and Youth Protection Services; Budget Paper 3, pp. 95-97, 99-100; Budget Statements G, pp. 19-20 In relation to: Youth recidivism 1. The Minister for Corrections stated in the chamber on 25 October 2017 that 'ACT Corrective Services is working with Child and Youth Protection Services on establishing a framework for information sharing. This will allow AMC staff to have access to relevant information regarding a detainee's prior history in the ACT youth justice system.' What is the current status of this information sharing framework? a. When will the framework be in full operation? Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:- In relation to: Youth recidivism 1. An information sharing agreement between Children, Youth and Families and ACT Corrective Services was signed in July 2018. This agreement outlines the arrangements for the sharing of information between Child and Youth Protection Services and the Alexander Maconochie Centre. a. This agreement became operational in July 2018. Approved for circulation to the Select Committee on Estimates 2018-2019 Signature: Date: 2, J l I I By the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth, Minister Rachel Stephen-Smith *Estimates - QON No. E18-625 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Disability, Children and Youth Ref: Community Services, Children and Youth, Output Class 3.3 Child and Youth Protection Services; Budget Paper 3, pp. 95-97, 99-100; Budget Statements G, pp. 19-20 In relation to: Circles of Security parenting program 1. When was the Circles of Security parenting program first established in the ACT? 2. How many people have undertaken the Circles of Security parenting program each year for . the past five years? 3. How many sessions make up the Circles of Security program and what is the duration of each session? 4. How many sessions out of the program are delivered individually and in groups? 5. How many participants make up a group session? 6. How often is the Circles of Security program run? 7. Where is the Circles of Security program delivered? 8. How does the Circles of Security program address parenting and disability? 9. What other Parenting Assistance Sessions help parents address disability? Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:- 1. The Child and Family Centres commenced delivering the Circle of Security program in 2014. 2. Until recently, Circle of Security sessions were recorded as part of case management for families with high and complex needs rather than being delivered on an individual basis. Determining annual service user figures for the last five years therefore would be a manual process and represent an unreasonable diversion of resources. However, from February 2014 -June 2018 a total of 408 individuals have participated in the Circle of Security group program. This included 160 individuals, across 15 groups in 2017-18. In addition, for the 2017-18 reporting period, the Child and Family Centres delivered 47 individual Circle of Security sessions to families. The data for individual Circle of Security sessions to families for February 2014 to June 2017 is the data that would need to be processed manually and is therefore unavailable. 3. The Circle of Security program is delivered over eight sessions, with each session being 90 minutes in duration. 4. The Child and Family Centres have delivered the Circle of Security group program 43 times since 2014. The Child and Family Centres delivered 47 individual Circle of Security sessions to families for the 2017-18 reporting period. Signature: Approved By 8. 5 7. 9. 6. the . The The for The The the child The Community Child Whilst therapeutic Child with form and catch of and Centres, and designed Other of development. delivery Developing who participate manual participation Families NDIS Minister Security the service for • • • • • Circle Circle additional Child carers maximum program Family families are part and EACH and up Parenting three the circulation develop have be better understand process or case who it for session may to and Family Family of of of Circle has with users more program individual to Centres in Kids Services advice enhance Child Security individual Security Disability, where in increased is have managed group jointly have Family Parenting also manage number needs. available a disability. and which Assistance skills and of Centre Centre if mindful range to and they registered provided Security additional been are and their sessions enables represent the and support their Centres attachment program Circle program to The Family is case of their Children also on awareness of have staff programs recognise Select parent assistance facilitated to delivered at of children participants There group Child families a of Sessions parents ACT their program management able needs child's parents by because been families may Centres. also to Security needs is is an Committee specialists with and Government and attend are currently an to programs moment security unreasonable work work may are their who of unable at basis, sessions deliver by emotional and 8 occasions Family available and Youth, confidence. and is their the who week of inclusive the in session be primarily a closely with may child's carers a a there or carers Alexander Circle - records. between to older offered complexity to Child to-moment Circle have responses such individual on Centres relationship-based to Minister will have families attend account school to Estimates and prior families where of emotional is with of of than to: concerns Development as diversion always of families delivered complexity children Security additional all a Determining behavioural Tuning Security parents, are to the minimum one Maconochie sites families Rachel on eight Circle the to for of June parenting assessed wheelchair be Child their an presenting of 2018-2019 individual include Child about across needs; of into birth-8 group from years informed the individual of group 2017 Stephen-Smith carers in resources. needs and child; Development Security Service. of Kids; early family and group difficulties; service their the as Canberra. three of choices; Parents are Centre, would Date: years, a is and accessible not including age. Family diversity disability needs. three Cool 14. intervention by offered children's sessions casework circumstances. session times being children. user individual be including Belconnen Little as 14i Child Centres These and therefore Service Teachers figures of an disability. specific a suitable (,\\cg' and . for Kids; year The backgrounds and basis individual The Page program instances families parents can work Child and for at and Family Circle issues. where a and to cater each 2 the of 3 *Estimates - QON No. E18-626 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA ANSWER TO QUESTION ON NOTICE Elizabeth Kikkert: To ask the Minister for Multicultural Affairs Ref: Community Services, Children and Youth, Output Class 3.3 Child and Youth Protection Services; Budget Paper 3, pp. 95-97, 99-100; Budget Statements G, pp. 19-20 In relation to: English class funding for employment agencies 1. Which employment agencies receive funding to provide English classes for culturally and linguistically diverse (CALO) clients? 2. What options are available for CALD people to undertake English classes if they do not interact with an employment agency, i.e., full-time parent, elderly, etc.? Ms Stephen-Smith: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:- 1. The Community Services Directorate funds Multicultural Employment Services (MES) to develop and implement a 12 month individual, case managed employment program for refugees, asylum seekers and people from non-English speaking backgrounds. MES provide two levels of English language support under the MES Communication for Employment program. These are: • Workplace culture/communication for those with some English language skills who need to speak more clearly; and • Communication for Employment program for those who are job ready needing more intensive English language support. Additionally, the Commonwealth Government's Job Active employment service will refer people to the Commonwealth Skills for Education and Employment (SEE) program for language, literacy and numeracy training to help job seekers participate more effectively in training or in the labour force. The program is delivered across Australia and caters for job seekers with literacy and/or numeracy training needs including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, youth, people with disabilities, mature aged people, and job seekers from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. 2. Clients from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALO) backgrounds can attend English language programs such as English for employment, English for living and a home tutor program delivered by the Migrant and Refugee Settlement Services (MARSS). The Canberra Institute of Technology also offers a variety of English language classes. This includes classes for fee paying international students and partially government funded training (up to 90% funded and students pay approximately 10%) for domestic students (Australian or NZ citizens, permanent Australian residents or holders of an Australian Signature: Approved By the Services details Additionally, organisations CSD, are migrant permanent Minister for able where circulation available - english to to for deliver receive resident CIT Multicultural the are - waives program at: Commonwealth experienced to the 12 http humanitarian the months Adult the : Select //www.navitas - amep Affairs, student Migrant English in Committee - in providing Government Minister - visa). the portion English classes - act/ \ - english Asylum Rachel on services of Program for the Estimates funds . eom seekers free fees. Stephen-Smith V to . au/news Navitas of (AMEP) new charge 2018-2019 with migrants English - the in and under the Date: ACT - events/news/the ACT and and an Services . refugees. KU agreement Both Children's Access Page Further - with adult Card 2 of - 2 The nature a is where 2 not unless In indicating ESO Statement 1. MINISTER In CAROLINE [Ref: Signature: Approved By . decision. provided those A relation Schedule be the • • • Conservator 2 1. are ConseNator's . Output the a in conservation Minister Are Clear Likely stage? conservation included Is Do proposed instances accordance that the GENTLEMAN: Conservator to: {EIS) for and accordingly LE ~ you works a. b. 4 Class more COUTEUR to Conservator of Recommendations circulation the Fauna have where Is If for also impact the as so, this where development within 2.1- proposal representative than conditions the matters Planning any with provides what is for changing . a Ms Mr SELECT of LEGISLATIVE FOR overridden Environment on Environment; MLA: 0.Sha proposal an internal The a nature to Flora the Andrew Caroline of percentage reserve, a is ESO the inform listed T Flora answer and Conservator's not advice of To of H and COMMITTEE over Select may cannot conservation E native approval on appeal Wall is ask likely attends Le Development species and by AUSTRALIAN Fauna the Couteur Development time? impact on to and QUESTION the the Conservator MLA Committee of Fauna to assessment vegetation, the be DAs mechanisms eventual Minister Heritage, planning pre-application provides have to or (Chair), given, Member's advice on MLA, ON under the community, asked a a Act ESTIMATES Development significant regulated the Ms ON Ms for on Applications DAs of department? is the Mick an track or provides for C Elizabeth Tara submitted Flora proposal Estimates when the NOTICE Environmental A question have provisions advice PIT ASSEMBLY Gentleman that Cheyne Environment meetings and tree the impact incorporated 2018-2019 A triggers Lee the L by would Application Fauna] made . Conservator's 2018-2019 to is TERRITORY MLA Any MLA, proponents of DA as the . where the Any follows:- for trigger must Significance DA (Deputy by Landscape Ms and Tree the Date *Estimates an conditions where Suzanne this appropriate. be (DA) Heritage Environmental Conservator a : Protection Chair) at advice lodged advice? full 112... . the pre-application Review Opinion Orr EIS. , t?(I decision attached on - in MLA QON and nature Act Impacts of Panel (ESO) Impact Flora 2005 advice may No. to for an on E18-627 MINISTER CAROLINE In [Ref: relation 4. 3 2 1. 1. . . Output the grasses animals the to grassland danger With rural Invasive native infrastructure. economy Rabbits because Invasive What What For Canberra? Can GENTLEMAN: neighbouring to LE perimeter landscape each you : areas 2.2 the COUTEUR steps is c. a. b. a. Invasive animals and and are for the animals plants they - please exception of and/or and their What How Have How Conservation of feed one the in are wildflowers most can the this woodland causing of or Ms Species Mr SELECT are F LEGISLATIVE Invasive many many cats you last provide any of stock other MLA: and prioritised OR Namadgi human The causing ACT serious damage Andrew Caroline way Australia's introduced of three taking cats roaming? their THE fines people answer where animals rabbits, serious resources To can COMMITTEE . an grasses and been health. reserves threat Blackberry significant Wall financial ask Le habit high National to have update impact AUSTRALIAN for Couteur Land they living ensure to QUESTION the most . environmental seized each MLA plants control country such of from the been or In Minister because Management] impact on constructing on years in (Chair), the serious actions Park of Member's habitat and MLA, ON enforcement in as that cat public invasive how issued these in ACT cat peatlands, African ESTIMATES and - willows containment the on Ms spread ON Ms they for invasive environmental containment are invasive destruction. safety. feral natural Tidbinbilla related CAPITAL ACT Elizabeth Tara and the species? NOTICE question needed spread lovegrass underground ASSEMBLY are and pests are agricultural Cheyne Environment of wetlands, species grasses and to 2018-2019 a the cat rabbits, impact Lee areas threat rapidly to breach are Nature is areas? cultural TERRITORY MLA Wild and MLA, manage pests. as prioritised are are have containment and follows:- upon to warrens degradation. serrated pigs, (Deputy and dogs of Ms affecting Reserve and the our values *Estimates affect They cat been Suzanne this out foxes the are main Heritage water containment Chair), for can compete tussock impact? compete environment cautioned water controlled to by the and threat control in areas? be Orr catchments afford preying environment wild devastating - supply MLA increase QON with native to protection dogs. about areas? around on the and/or native No. fire to E18-628 in 3. 3. 2. 2. These These TCCS TCCS the the which which our our de-sexing de-sexing advising advising aware aware and and The The approach approach home home activities activities inquiries inquiries non-compliance non-compliance species) species) result, result, Requests Requests Park Park displaces displaces numbers. numbers. 'risk 'risk ecosystems, ecosystems, Rabbits Rabbits Managing Managing native native lovegrass, lovegrass, Control Control Control Control biological biological mountain mountain most most also also most most of of and and supports supports in in species species are are of of species. species. managing managing harms" harms" with with Agreements. Agreements. control control pose pose with with It It address address managing managing likelihood likelihood commitments commitments a. a. budget budget efforts efforts needs needs into into of of these these advised advised and and the the the the including including sensitive sensitive for for local local serious serious to to programs programs is is control control usually usually cats cats serrated serrated Ongoing Ongoing the the important important managing managing ie. ie. compliance compliance protected protected grassy grassy rural rural both both status status a a through through forests forests are are suburbs. suburbs. to to RSPCA RSPCA native native significant significant is is cat cat model model continue continue of of alter alter commitment commitment Blackberry Blackberry The The a a are are of of the the dog-related dog-related be be threats threats considered considered termed termed agents agents number number lessees lessees priority priority of of invasive invasive lowland lowland containment containment ecosystems, ecosystems, rehoming. rehoming. tussock, tussock, the the control control of of woodlands woodlands and and advised advised multi-pronged multi-pronged 2018-19 2018-19 fire fire effective effective responsibility responsibility of of plants plants ACT ACT Similarly, Similarly, the the whereby whereby their their made made that that cat cat option option areas areas In In Namadgi Namadgi provides provides to to regimes, regimes, action action in in from from threat threat TCCS TCCS transformers transformers and and in in addition, addition, urban urban containment containment of of and and species species is is of of other other be be the the suburb suburb Chilean Chilean including including to to its its through through also also will will key key as as incidents incidents managed managed budget budget rabbits rabbits control control is is focused focused to to invasive invasive high high threats threats speak speak website. website. around around such such environment environment efforts efforts EPSDD EPSDD in in status. status. an an able able to to invasives, invasives, trap trap allow allow pest pest a a significant significant land land National National change change relation relation on on of of animal animal transformer transformer natural natural in in to to signage signage country country needle needle as as announced announced to to to to is is the the to to the the rare rare cats cats land land in in species, species, be be managers managers to to shares shares take take to to in in urban urban by by land land plants plants the the prioritised prioritised by by through through influence influence 2021-22 2021-22 their their the the Residents Residents effective effective Ainslie/Majura Ainslie/Majura pet pet manage manage early early public public water water EPSDD. EPSDD. nuisance nuisance to to on on orchids. orchids. ecologists ecologists they they Park. Park. systems systems particularly particularly high high grass, grass, precedence precedence is is managers managers funding funding grasslands grasslands longer longer (myxomotosis (myxomotosis cat cat owner owner their their Canberra. Canberra. neighbours neighbours resources resources provided provided in in and and stages stages manage. manage. species species flows flows country country safety safety the the providing providing containment containment in in to to an an In In management management and and cat cat in in and and of of with with own own the the term. term. those those if if control control issue. issue. additional additional and and ACT ACT to to the the because because cat cat allowed allowed populations populations of of and and Coolatai Coolatai to to where where are are is is ACT ACT RSPCA RSPCA and and in in and and land. land. base base and and over over grasslands grasslands TCCS TCCS considering considering landscape landscape and and containment containment relates relates supported supported strategically strategically if if areas areas EPSDD EPSDD all all Residents Residents nutrient nutrient advice advice given given the the invasive invasive also also grassy grassy and and its its knowledge knowledge cat cat funding funding Namadgi Namadgi cat cat they they they they to to takes takes for for are are $0.3M $0.3M grass grass spread spread identity identity through through it it two two take take to to containment containment the the proliferate proliferate containment containment has has to to increases increases cat cat triaged triaged through through woodlands. woodlands. share share can can the the cycles, cycles, to to in in species. species. by by an an residents residents with with strains strains highest highest whether whether (a (a good good responsibility responsibility management management assured, assured, with with plan plan deliver deliver Namadgi Namadgi suburbs suburbs is is National National spread spread transform transform at at educational educational new new of of with with Land Land a a a a concerns concerns least least according according cat cat the serious serious and and communication communication common common further further education education intervention intervention fire fire of of to to incursion incursion priority. priority. This This TCCS TCCS protection protection to to suburbs suburbs Management Management via via of of matters matters Calicivirus). Calicivirus). increase increase large large displace displace three three are are danger danger National National Park. Park. purchase purchase African African Page Page individual individual is is native native ongoing ongoing threat threat to to made made about about for for known known to to border border As As ensure ensure and and 2 2 the the and and the the to to a a of of to to to to a a 3 3 Signat By Approved the 4a c. b ~ . These system) Minister The due operational facility owner No No for to number cats fines 2017-18-3 figures 2015-16 2016-17 circulation roaming and obligations to for have have house the therefore of at have been - - cautions been cats the Environment 0 1 seized to been to end seized the is issued, the as comply of Select issued cats. drawn follows: accuracy 2018. in however cat and Such with Committee by from containment Heritage, TCCS a cat of facility an where data containment officers older on in Mick is owners database the Estimates under areas. to Gentleman former people and construction are TCCS (recently 2018-2019 identified, management. database living do not in replaced Date: currently and cat containment is TCCS difficult expected 21-l"7 looks by have a to to modern /r:ts to verify. Page a advise suitable be areas 3 of on 3 MINISTER CAROLINE In [Ref: relation 2. 1. 3 2 1. . . Output The sick appropriation. volunteers contribution a The budget required In Jerrabomberra Contacting as people Less The ACT accommodation and Wetlands. about used they & What Has Has 2017-18 addition City injured GENTLEMAN: to: LE and Parks Environment, the 2017-18 nature the Wildlife complex Class provide to COUTEUR coordination Funding where Services who and do Government Government orphaned equipment and kangaroos Environment . 2 - to either in reserves, will Pait have to has ACT to to tasks previous the Environment] Conservation In for Mr SELECT Ms LEGISLATIVE FOR Wetlands on ACT continue wildlife take of MLA: and been late The found Budget Access upgrade Andrew Caroline Planning wildlife where native this such work Wildlife . allocated a injured being considered TH considered 2017-18, answer provided drop service To funding COMMITTEE Grant injured injured as Canberra A E to is Initiative animals to for Wall ask carers Le of injured directed done and provide Service take off to wildlife? Couteur use the USTRALIAN to QUESTION the of MLA level $80,000 Transport help was point on Sustainable wildlife with the $34,642 by tendering by injured building regular, in Minister Better or our birds (Chair), agreements? support made ACT Parks this the allocated to Member's MLA ON license for ACT the roads? to to ACT. or additional Wildlife ESTIMATES , wildlife, injured services Canberra to core at and Wildlife Ms an improve ON Ms contact for Parks lizards out Directorate's 'fit Jerrabomberra their for CAPITAL additional Elizabeth Tara to the Conservation funding NOTICE question wildlife out' the . wildlife upgrade and ASSEMBL and The voluntary in will Cheyne Environment will Access funding community and use the your 2018-2019 Conservation what upgrade be Lee result for caring City $10,000 of . upgraded is directed community- TERRITORY an MLA environment Canberra MLA, ACT this as in information services Wetlands, Services Service existing in follows:- 2018-19 services, (Deputy facility works Wildlife, facilities Ms complex and available *Estimates to building Suzanne Service or or Heritage in also ACT building have as Chair), ACT from Y Transport ACT caring Improving website such given to at wildlife office made Wildlife in Jerrabomberra give Orr on Wildlife. been with Wildlife within as the at for the - call MLA the the QON a directs the issues completed. 2017-18 Canberra injured, $10,000 service our ranger current RSPCA public received parks No. such . E18-629 3. No. EPSDD has worked closely with ACT Wildlife since its inception, recognising that they have formed to offer a volunteer based service around caring for injured wildlife. Approved for circulation to the Select Committee on Estimates 2018-2019 Signature: Date: 1/ {7/(--fr .. By the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Mick Gentleman The Government has not tendered out wildlife caring services. Page 2 of 2 *Estimates - QON No. E18-630 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY FOR THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY SELECT COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES 2018-2019 Mr Andrew Wall MLA (Chair), Ms Tara Cheyne MLA (Deputy Chair), Ms Caroline Le Couteur MLA, Ms Elizabeth Lee MLA, Ms Suzanne Orr MLA QUESTION ON NOTICE CAROLINE LE COUTEUR MLA: To ask the Minister for the Environment and Heritage [Ref: Heritage {Output Class 2.3)] In relation to: The National Trust The National Trust is an important community stakeholder and the Government relies on them as a representative body for the heritage sector. For example, they were on the Community Panel for the Yarralumla Brickworks. However, the National Trust doesn't get any operational funding for this work. 1. Why doesn't the Government provide operational funding for the National Trust the way you do in the arts, sport and environment sectors? 2. Have you investigated this in the past? MINISTER GENTLEMAN: The answer to the Member's question is as follows:- 1. While the Trust has an advocacy role for heritage, demonstrated through its involvement in ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal appeals, annual heritage awards and monthly newsletters, it currently provides limited conservation projects and a small number of education and promotion programs such as an annual open day at a heritage place and tours. To date, the National Trust ACT Branch (the Trust) has not demonstrated that it provides programs or services that support, promote and/or conserve heritage in the ACT in a similar way to other groups in the areas noted such as artsACT. For comparison, artsACT Key Arts Organisation (KAO) funding supports ACT arts organisations that provide substantial programs, services, expertise and infrastructure to support and develop the arts in the ACT. In the 2015-16 financial year, funding of $5.35 million supported 17 KAOs (roughly $315,000 per organisation per year), including organisations that manage ACT Government arts facilities providing significant infrastructure. Further, in the ACT, the ACT Government and Commonwealth Government conducts much of the business that National Trust branches elsewhere in Australia deliver such as an annual Heritage Festival and management of heritage properties. The ACT Heritage Grants Program {the program) provides approximately $350,000 annually for projects that promote and conserve our local heritage and from 2001-16 the Trust has received at least one grant each year totallin"g approximately 45 grants. 2. The Government has taken numerous opportunities to provide support to the Trust in consideration of requests and the overall budget. A number of the projects and ideas put forward by the Trust seeking funding from the ACT Government outside the formal heritage grants and budget round, have not included clear business cases, project scope, demonstrated outcomes, accurate costings or budget breakdowns. In 2011, $60,000 was provided to enable the Trust to continue operating and to develop a strategic business plan to assist in a clearer organisation function. To date, a strategic business plan has not been provided by the Trust. Since then the Government has continually encouraged the Trust to develop a sound strategic and sustainable business model to secure the Trust's long-term viability. This would support a pre-budget submission the Trust may wish to make. The Government has also offered historic/heritage properties to the Trust for office accommodation and as venues to provide revenue opportunities through tours, ehibitions etc. The Trust however has rejected several opportunities for support including $86,000 to purchase its quarter share of the Lanyon collection and rent free office accommodation in Cargill's Cottage, Kingston. The Trust has also been advised to explore the range of other funding sources available to the community in addition to ACT Government funding through private sector partnerships, grants and sponsorship. · Approved for circulation to the Select Committee on Estimates 2018-2019 By the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Mick Gentleman Page 2 of 2