7 hours ago
14
The Northern Territory government is removing a protection introduced to avoid a repeat of the Stolen Generation as part of sweeping reforms to the child protection system.
The draft legislation was revealed alongside details of a major review into the territory’s child protection system, announced in the wake of the high-profile death of five-year-old Kumanjayi Little Baby in Alice Springs.
It has been condemned by a coalition of 330 First Nations and justice organisations, who say the territory government is promoting a narrative that is “dangerous, ignorant, and wrong”.
The NT minister for child protection, Robyn Cahill, told reporters that former New South Wales police commissioner Karen Webb will lead that review, alongside NT public servant Greg Shanahan.
The alleged killing of the Warlpiri child has prompted nationwide mourning and calls to review the conditions in Alice Springs town camps, the child protection system and custodial systems in the NT, even as her mother has repeatedly asked that her child’s death not be used for political reasons.
A 47-year-old man who is not related to the child or connected to her care has been charged with murder and two other offences, but is yet to face court in person or enter a plea.
Cahill told reporters on Wednesday that she had been working on changes to the Care and Protection of Children Act for a year.
“I have made it clear on multiple occasions that I will not be a minister who abandons yet another generation of territory kids,” she said. “The reality is that we have kids in really difficult situations and for a long time people have been paralysed by the fear that they’ll be accused of doing that.”
The amendments erode the Aboriginal child placement principle, a national framework that has been enshrined in legislation since the 1980s in response to the forced removal of Indigenous children through the Stolen Generations. It will be replaced with a new universal principle.
In a joint statement with 330 other organisations, Aboriginal Peak Organisations Northern Territory (APO NT) and SNAICC, the peak body for First Nations children, said they oppose any legislative changes that would remove or dilute the Aboriginal child placement principle and Aboriginal concepts of kinship; makes it easier for Aboriginal children to be removed; makes it more difficult for Aboriginal children to be placed in kinship care; and makes it more difficult for Aboriginal children to be reunifed with family or return to Country.
They said lowering the threshold for removing children and fast-tracking long-term placements will “deepen an already devastating crisis, with consequences for generations of Aboriginal Territorians”; and that abolishing the Aboriginal child placement principle “is a race-based attempt to blame Aboriginal families for conditions created by government failure and moves us further from Closing the Gap targets”.
“We strongly reject the NT Government’s deliberate portrayal of Aboriginal families, communities, and culture as a risk to children’s safety,” APO NT chief executive, Theresa Roe, said.
The draft legislation removes sections of the current act which state an Aboriginal child “has the right to be brought up within [their] own family and community and on the child’s own country”, and also removes the direct reference to the Aboriginal child placement principle. Instead it says that a child’s family has the primary responsibility for their care and upbringing, but that “a child must be removed from the child’s family if there is a significant and likely risk of harm to the child”.
It adds that as far as practicable “and consistent with the best interests of the child”, children should be placed “in close proximity” to their family and community and should be “supported to develop and maintain a connection with the child’s family, community, culture, traditions, language and country, particularly when the child is placed with a person who is not a member of the child’s community or kinship group”.
Cahill said the amendments were designed to protect children from ongoing harm, minimise the extensive number of placements vulnerable children are exposed to and provide stability and permanency.
“The ongoing cycle of harm, risk and uncertainty needs to be addressed and the only way to achieve that is to put the basic human rights of a child’s safety before anything else,” she said. “Under these amendments there will be more consistent support and better outcomes for both children and their families.
“Every child matters regardless of where they come from, their race or religion. I am not prepared to turn a blind eye and abandon another generation of families and children.”
Cahill said Family Responsibility Agreements – aimed at addressing child welfare concerns or antisocial behaviour before formal statutory intervention – will be strengthened and expanded to encourage parents and families to remain responsible and accountable.
“This is a legislated framework for early but reasonable intervention after every effort is made to keep families together,” Cahill said. “Where it is safe to do so we want children with their families, but where it is not, we will act decisively to give children the permanency, stability and care they deserve.”
The child protection review has also been denounced by First Nations children’s advocates and legal services, who have urged the Country Liberal party government to widen the scope to include other departments that influence the safety of Indigenous children, including housing, health and corrections.
Speaking to ABC Radio, the federal minister for Indigenous Australians, Malarndirri McCarthy criticised Cahill’s comments.
“What that comment implies is that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families don’t know how to look after their families,” McCarthy told ABC.
“That is not the case, and I would urge the minister to ensure she is speaking with them.”
