Its recommendations include amending the Child Protection Act to entrench adoption as the third permanency option for all children, regardless of cultural background.

The commission also recommended the government start a feasibility study within six months to assess how to deliver “simple open adoption” for appropriate children in out-of-home care.

The report notes contemporary adoption operates in a “fundamentally different legal and ethical framework” than past practices, and it is characterised by openness, judicial oversight, and a “focus on the child’s best interest”.

But Debbie Kilroy, chief executive of Sisters Inside, an Aboriginal-led organisation advocating for the human rights of women and girls in prison and their families, said elevating adoption in the permanency hierarchy would risk “repeating history”.

“There is no way to separate adoption from the history of stolen generations,” she said.

“Aboriginal children and Torres Strait Islander children were removed under the guise of acting in the best interest for generations.

“And that’s what we still have, the state saying they are still operating for the best interest of children.”

Ms Kilroy said in her experience, providing financial support to parents would help them to be able to continue to care for their children in the community.

“The women that we walk alongside and the children who are in [residential] care, for example, are people who have been taken because of poverty, because of homelessness,” she said.

“Not because of some horrific abuse that has been perpetrated by their mother to their child.”

Western Sydney University Professor Karleen Gribble, who has researched simple adoption, said the current adoption framework was “a relic of the past”.

She said the difference between simple adoption and the current framework was that it recognised the importance of an adopted child’s connection to their birth family.

“Simple adoption would enable children to have lifelong legal belonging in an adopted family while retaining legal relatedness to the family of origin,” she said.

‘Like turning around an ocean liner’

The commissioner has recommended the Department of Child Safety should be “redesigned and restructured” within six months of the government’s response to the report.

The report said the commission had heard evidence of “fragmented responsibility, variable practice, unclear accountability and difficulty tracking children’s pathways through the system”.

Youth Advocacy Centre chief executive Katherine Hayes said it would be “like turning around an ocean liner”.

“It’s going to take a really long time, but it’s really important that the government starts this right now,” she said.

“Already there are more kids in residential care now than there were a year ago, so the government’s already lagging behind making these really important changes.”

The report found that government policy relied “too heavily” on residential care, which has become a billion-dollar sector.

Ms Hayes said the commission “confirmed what everyone in the sector already knew”.

“That the Department of Child Safety is a huge, expensive failure.

Child Safety Minister Amanda Camm said the recommendation would need “careful consideration”.

“This is not one department’s fault or fix; this is a whole-of-government approach that we are taking to fix the broken child safety system,” she said.

The government convened its first meeting of a cabinet-subcommittee on Thursday, which is considering the government’s response to the recommendations made and is expected to provide a response within two months.

Minister ‘not concerned’ by findings on response times

The report highlighted that response times to investigate reports of vulnerable children had plummeted since last year’s rollout of a bungled IT system called Unify.

The proportion of investigations commenced for the most urgent cases fell from 91 per cent in July 2024 to March 2025, to just 44 per cent from April 2025 to March 2026.

Ms Camm sensationally dismissed the figures.

“No, I’m not concerned by the data that has been outlined in the Commission of Inquiry, because it is not comparable data,” she said.

“I am not concerned, because I have overseen the remediation plan of Unify.”

Opposition Leader Steven Miles reiterated his calls for Ms Camm to be sacked.

“It is frightening that the Minister for Child Safety is not concerned that more than half of children are not seen fast enough,” he said.

“It underlines why this child safety minister is the wrong person to do the important work of reforming the child safety system.”