Thursday, 5 October 2023

Child protection

Matthew BACH (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (18:19): (491) Thirty-six score and nine days ago in this place the government introduced a very good bill. It was down in the other place, and Mr Pearson actually introduced it. He introduced this bill to seek to make sure that children leaving the care system could have support up until the age of 21. He did so on 6 October back in 2021, a mere 729 days ago. Now, if anybody has seen that bill, I would like to know where it is and to bring it back, because, at the time, I was very clear that on the opposition benches we wholeheartedly supported this bill. Mr Pearson actually made a very good contribution when he introduced the bill 729 days ago. He said this:

We know that many young people leaving care experience a difficult transition and achieve much poorer life outcomes than their peers.

Well, that is putting it mildly.

It is incumbent on us as a society to take action to address disparities in life outcomes for young people for whom the state has had parental responsibility.

Absolutely – and I would go further than that to say that we have a moral obligation as a state to care for young people whom the state has brutalised and traumatised. We have had many discussions over the last few days about the hideous things, the awful things, that happen to young people in the care of the state here in Victoria. Well, if the state is in loco parentis and if the state is going to brutalise and traumatise young people, then the state should provide support at least up to the age of 21 through the provision of housing and other like supports.

The minister said the government was going to legislate this change 729 days ago. Members who were here before the last election will remember that we debated that bill, but before the committee stage it mysteriously disappeared, and it has never come back. Minister Pearson actually went on to say this:

Evidence shows that supporting care leavers is not only the morally right thing to do –

ordinarily I would not take lectures on ethics from Mr Pearson, but I will on this occasion –

it makes good economic sense, with downstream savings across other areas of support including homelessness, mental health, and the criminal justice system.

Mr Pearson is actually right this time. So the action that I seek from the Minister for Children is not just to bring back the bill that we saw 729 days ago but to understand her mind and the mind of the government when it comes to the provision of support to care leavers up to the age of 25. To use Mr Pearson’s logic, that would not cost the government money, it would actually save the government money. It is economically the right thing to do. It would lead to significant downstream cost savings. I think Mr Pearson was actually right when he said that 729 days ago, and I think we should go further than the government has ever proposed to up the age of support to 25.