We asked, you said, we did

We asked people to share their views and feedback on any issues or impediments to people coming forward and sharing information with Royal Commissions. We did this as part of a review of how the Royal Commissions Act 1902 (Cth) operates to protect sensitive information given, or sought to be given, to a Royal Commission.

Feedback in submissions to the review was generally positive and indicated that the new confidentiality protections implemented by the Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Act 2021 have been helpful in terms of giving people greater confidence to share stories and experiences with the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability.

Thank you to everyone who provided a response.

The feedback received has been used to inform the final report of the review.

The report identifies several possible legislative amendments to the Royal Commissions Act for further consideration:

• applying confidentiality protections to future royal commissions
• establishing processes for the operation of non-publication directions, including their lifting or amendment in appropriate circumstances
• the admissibility of evidence given to a Royal Commission in tribunal proceedings
• extending the scope of retribution protections for confidential submissions
• options for clarifying circumstances in which non‑disclosure agreements might restrict information being provided to a Royal Commission
• the possibility of allowing civil remedies to be sought within the Royal Commissions Act.

In the May 2021 Budget, the Australian Government announced increased funding for Children’s Contact Services (CCS), including funding to establish 20 additional CCS across Australia.

We sought your feedback on a draft methodology to estimate demand for new CCS by Statistical Level Area Level 4 (SA4) in order to determine the location for the new CCS. 

We received a total of 81 submissions to our consultation.  

Responses came from across Australia and included submissions from citizens, family law professionals and service providers.

Stakeholder feedback on the draft methodology indicated:  

• General support for the factors considered, with particular support for population per CCS, proximity, and disadvantage.
• Dissatisfaction with the measure used to determine proximity.
• Support for a more holistic measure of disadvantage.
• Support for a greater focus on proximity in the weighting of factors.

Other feedback included:

• Support for the inclusion of a factor considering domestic and family violence.  

The input we received made a substantial contribution to the final methodology used to determine the 20 locations selected.

The final methodology is based on the 3 factors that received the greatest amount of support in the consultation.

It includes a new proximity measure, and considers proximity to be the most significant factor in estimating demand. It also includes a more holistic measure of disadvantage.

The final 20 locations selected are:

1. Wide Bay, QLD
2. Queensland – Outback, QLD
3. Sydney – South West, NSW
4. Hunter Valley exc. Newcastle, NSW
5. Northern Territory – Outback, NT
6. Western Australia – Outback (North), WA
7. New England and North West, NSW
8. Melbourne – North West, VIC
9. Melbourne – Outer East, VIC
10. Adelaide – North, SA
11. North West, VIC
12. Gold Coast, QLD
13. Far West and Orana, NSW
14. Perth – North East, WA
15. Hume, VIC
16. Barossa – Yorke - Mid North, SA
17. Latrobe – Gippsland, VIC
18. Cairns, QLD
19. Sydney – North Sydney and Hornsby, NSW
20. Riverina, NSW