Administered Items for the Department of Treasury and Finance, $2,058,173,000

Minister:

Hon. C.L. Wingard, Minister for Police, Emergency Services and Correctional Services, Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing.

Departmental Advisers:

Mr D. Lane, Chief Executive, SAFECOM.

Mr L. Pineda, Business Manager, SAFECOM.

Mr A. Stark, Acting Chief Officer, SA Country Fire Service.

Ms L. Lew, Business Manager, SA Country Fire Service.

Mr G. Benham, Acting Deputy Chief Officer, SA Metropolitan Fire Service.

Ms L. Cvetanovic, Business Manager, SA Metropolitan Fire Service.

Mr. C. Beattie, Chief Officer, State Emergency Service.

Ms S. Di Ciocco, Business Manager, State Emergency Service.

The CHAIR: The next portfolio for examination is SAFECOM, SA Country Fire Service, SA Metropolitan Fire Service, State Emergency Service and Emergency Services Levy Fund. The minister appearing is once again the Minister for Police, Emergency Services and Correctional Services. Minister, would you like to introduce your advisers?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Thank you, Chair, I certainly would. On my far left, your far right, is Andrew Stark, Acting Chief Officer of the CFS. To my immediate left is Dominic Lane, the Chief Executive of SAFECOM. To my right is Mr Chris Beattie, the Chief Officer of the SES. Behind me is Glenn Benham, the Acting Deputy Chief Officer of the MFS. We have people in the third row too: Luba Cvetanovic, MFS Business Manager; Lisa Lew, CFS Business Manager; Silvana Di Ciocco, SES Business Manager; and Luis Pineda, SAFECOM Business Manager. It is very good to have them here and I am very glad that I have acknowledged them in Hansard for the shadow minister.

The CHAIR: Thank you, minister. I just clarify that this session is until 10.30am. Do you wish to make an opening statement?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, let's talk about the budget, please.

The CHAIR: Member for Elizabeth, do you have an opening statement or questions?

Mr ODENWALDER: No, not an opening statement, but I do want to welcome Mr Lane to the role. You have been in the role for three weeks now? I should ask the minister that, shouldn't I? I want to talk a little bit about the role of the CE of SAFECOM. I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 67, SAFECOM key agency outputs. Minister, were you personally involved in the appointment of Dominic Lane to the role of CE? What was the process by which the appointment was made?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That was made by a panel through the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment. The commissioner headed that up. From memory, there was a panel that involved, amongst others, the CFSVA, the SESVA executives and the UFU. I think the police commissioner was on that panel as well—there may have been one other—along with, as I said, the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment. I am informed the police commissioner was not on that panel. If you want to know the other members, I can chase that up for you if it is important to you.

Mr ODENWALDER: No, that is alright. How many other people were considered? How many people put their hand up for the role?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That I do not know. This was a recommendation that came to me from the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment.

Mr ODENWALDER: I do not want to pry, but is the new CE employed under the same payment conditions as the previous CE?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I would have to check that. I am sure that that is all publicly available, though.

Mr ODENWALDER: We are in the public now.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That would be reported in the annual reports. I do not have the detail in front of me. What is appropriate to be reported would be reported publicly.

Mr ODENWALDER: Will you take that on notice?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Are you talking about his terms and conditions and those sorts of things?

Mr ODENWALDER: I am talking about the pay and conditions. Is it roughly analogous to the previous CE's arrangements?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That would all be tabled through the Premier's department. That is readily available for you to access through the Premier's department's website.

Mr ODENWALDER: But I am asking you whether you will take that on notice and provide that to the committee?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: You want me to go to the website and get the information for you?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, I do.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I can do that if you do not want to go to the website; that is fine.

Mr ODENWALDER: Presumably Mr Lane is employed on a full-time basis?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Given that he is employed on a full-time basis, how was it that the previous CE was able to perform the role of the CE of SAFECOM on a part-time basis, on a three-day-a-week basis?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is a very good question. I think the last time we were here that was raised by the member for Kaurna, the previous minister in this role before me. I found it enlightening when the previous CE came to me and said that he could do the role on that basis. I accepted what he was saying and accepted that premise. Again, I spoke to the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment and we made that change to the contract, which triggered me to have a review of how this was working, because I asked the exact same question.

When the member for Kaurna was in this position and he was asked the same thing and the CE said that was what he could do, I was surprised that the member for Kaurna did not follow that up. That is the sort of thing that ran a flag to me. So we did that. We reviewed how it was operating and what was happening. As it turned out, when the chief of SAFECOM's contract ended he decided that he would not continue and, as a result, we decided to look for someone with the skill set needed.

As I mentioned a few moments ago, the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment went about finding that person and came to me with the recommendation of Dominic Lane, which I gleefully accepted, and we now have a full-time commissioner for SAFECOM. He is doing some really great work at this very early stage. Everything is going well. That is how we got to this point. I think I said 'commissioner', but it is 'chief executive'. I need to get those terms right.

Mr ODENWALDER: Indeed.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: My slip-up. I do apologise.

Mr ODENWALDER: I beg your pardon if you just mentioned this, but has the review into SAFECOM that you ordered last year, as you were just discussing, been completed?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That was what I outlined. We reviewed the way that the operation was structured. At the end of that, the then chief executive finished at the end of his contract. He decided not to go on. He has gone on to bigger and better things, I am informed, and we went about the process of getting the new chief executive. So that worked in wonderfully well with our review and here is the result of our review.

Mr ODENWALDER: What, just getting a new chief executive; that is the result of the review?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Fundamentally, what we wanted to do was look at the operations of how SAFECOM was working and what we needed to do. We think having the new chief executive in place is the right direction for us to go, and he is having a look at that and assessing how we operate and where we go as far as making sure we are complying with the act and doing those things.

I think at the time I read some public statements from you about a wideranging, sweeping review, which were actually incorrect and were never points that were made. What we wanted to do was look at the operation, how it was working and how it was meant to work. The fundamental change that we have made is that we have a new CE.

Mr ODENWALDER: You had a review into SAFECOM. I will just get the time line again: Mr Jackman announces he wants to go to three days, you agree with that proposition, that triggers a review into SAFECOM—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No—

Mr ODENWALDER: —hang on, you can clarify after—and the end result of that review process is that you just get a new CE?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The review, and the scope with which you are expanding the review, is very overinflated. I do not want to paraphrase, but I think you were reported in the media at some stage as saying it was some wideranging, far-reaching review and whatever else. That was not the case. We just wanted to have a look at the structure of the emergency service and how it was going to operate.

As I said, the suggestion that the CE go to three days a week did spark alarm bells, and I am surprised it did not spark alarm bells for the previous minister when the CE suggested the role could be done in that fashion. As it has turned out, we think the role is a full-time role and we have put the appropriate person in place to do that. The concept of the review is one that I think you out in the media pushed as a far wider ranging piece of work than it actually was.

Mr ODENWALDER: You told committee B last year that Christine Bierbaum would undertake the review and would work with the emergency services sector and SAFECOM to develop terms of reference, to identify appropriate governance arrangements, budgets and time frames. You said that a working group would be established, comprising chief officers, etc., as you have outlined. You said, 'The review will examine a number of other issues,' and, 'whether the functions provided by SAFECOM are delivered in the best manner'. So are you saying that the only sort of improvement to the functions provided by SAFECOM is that it has a new CE?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, what I think I said was—

Mr ODENWALDER: I am not saying that is not the case. I do not want to be disparaging of anyone's work.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I appreciate that. What I am saying is that one of the outcomes of that was that we do have a new CE to work through some of the things that I have outlined there and, if anything comes from that, we will put those processes in place. But one of the key outcomes, as I think I have outlined quite clearly, was to put a new CE in place.

Mr ODENWALDER: What were the other outcomes? What were the other recommendations of that review?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The other elements that you are talking about, the CE of SAFECOM will have a look at but, fundamentally, they will be cabinet-in-confidence, so I cannot speak about that obviously to this end. But the CE will work through—

Mr ODENWALDER: The entire result of that review is cabinet-in-confidence; is that what you are saying?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: Except for the fact that you have appointed a new CE.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I am saying is, and what I think I outlined there was, that the CE will work through any of those other elements which I mentioned a few moments ago. I think you mentioned that he has been in the job for three or maybe four weeks, so he will work through any of those other elements as they are put to him and we will work through those. Some of those elements are cabinet-in-confidence, so I cannot go into those details but, as they are worked through, we will implement them and/or make them public where appropriate.

Mr ODENWALDER: So a report of some sort with recommendations has gone to cabinet?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I cannot talk about what goes before cabinet. You are aware of that. You know the protocol.

Mr ODENWALDER: But I think you already did, though.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, what I said was—

Mr ODENWALDER: Didn't you say something had gone to cabinet?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, what I said was that there are elements that are cabinet-in-confidence, so I cannot talk about those, but what the CE will do, as far as an administrative and operational manner goes, is he will work through any of those recommendations. Where processes are needed, he will put them in place, but he has been in the job for three to four weeks. The point I was making from the get-go—

Mr ODENWALDER: Full-time?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The point I was making from the outset was that the new chief of SAFECOM is one of the outcomes from what we did when we had a look and had a review of the operations of SAFECOM.

Mr ODENWALDER: Did the chief officers of the MFS, CFS, and SES see any of these recommendations or see any reports or see any results of this review before anything went to cabinet?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The SAFECOM review?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, the SAFECOM review. Before these documents were prepared for cabinet—I am not asking what the documents are—did the chief officers have a chance to review them at all, or were they consulted?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I would have to check that and take that on notice.

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, will you take that on notice, thank you. I appreciate that. Will any of the recommendations of the review result in any job losses across any part of the emergency services sector?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That was not the intention. I think you read out the scope of the review before, so that was not in the scope of the review.

Mr ODENWALDER: It was not in the scope of the review at all?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: You read that out before. You read the—

Mr ODENWALDER: Well, it was really vague. So, within the scope of the review, there was no mention of workforce numbers or positions?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, that is correct.

Mr ODENWALDER: While we are on that type of thing, I will just go to the CFS workforce, which is Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 32, but you probably do not need to look this up. I am just wondering when a new chief officer will be appointed to the CFS?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That process is again with the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment, and they are doing that interview process at present.

Mr ODENWALDER: So nothing has come up to you yet regarding that?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: Did you not make some public comments last week about a candidate?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: Why has that process taken so long? Presumably, the previous chief officer's contract has expired. Why was there not an arrangement in place upon that expiration?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I think I outlined before that this is done through the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment. It is a very thorough process and you would have to ask—

Mr ODENWALDER: You have taken no interest in that? You have not tried to push it along?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is a matter for the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment. I would not want to rush a decision and make a wrong decision from that perspective, that is for sure. I will be guided by the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment, who does a very good job, and take the advice that comes from her.

Mr ODENWALDER: Why was the previous chief officer's contract not renewed?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It was renewed in December last year. It came up in the middle of fire season, which was not an appropriate time, in my opinion, to have a look at that. He was extended for another six months, but then the decision was made that we would go and search and see who was out there in the marketplace who might potentially want to work in what we think is a very good organisation.

Mr ODENWALDER: One of your stated reasons at the time was that you wanted to take the CFS into a new direction. I wonder if you could explain or outline what that new direction is for the committee?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What budget paper are you referring to?

Mr ODENWALDER: I am referring to the CFS workforce, Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 32. I am talking about the chief officer, who is part of the workforce presumably, and the reasons for his departure. One of those reasons was that you wanted to take the CFS into new directions.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I think I said was that his contract was up and it was not renewed. We want to have a look at who is out there and who is available and who might be interested in working in what we think is a really good organisation.

Mr ODENWALDER: So at no point did you say that you wanted to take the CFS into a new direction?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I think, again, the concept of a new direction has been very much overstated. We were looking for a new CE. A new chief will bring different ideas to the table. We want to have a really strong volunteer focus around what we do. We really appreciate and thank our volunteers for their great service. We want a strong focus on that, as far as the CFS is concerned. I have covered the state, visiting as many CFS brigades as I can. I think I have visited over 50 brigades, and the key element is making sure that we are growing our volunteer numbers and supporting our volunteers. That is a key focus, from where I stand, so that is what I am very keen and determined to do.

Mr ODENWALDER: The decision not to reappoint the previous chief officer, or not to offer a renewal of contract—however you want to characterise it—was that your decision?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: It was entirely your decision, okay. I just want to talk about the MFS.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What page?

Mr ODENWALDER: Page 32 of the Budget Measures Statement, where it talks about the PFAS contamination at Largs North.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Which line is that one?

Mr ODENWALDER: 'Operating initiatives, per-and poly-fluoroalkyl remediation and testing'.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: You said you were not going to say it. You said you were not going to try to get your lips around that word. Have another crack.

Mr ODENWALDER: No, that's that. We will call it PFAS.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Which line?

Mr ODENWALDER: Page 32. There are only a few words on that page and that is one of them.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Page 32 is CFS. Budget Paper 4, Volume 2?

Mr ODENWALDER: Budget Measures Statement, page 32.

The CHAIR: At the very bottom of the half page.

Mr ODENWALDER: There is some money set aside for continued testing, presumably across the MFS but largely related to Largs North Fire Station. Could you give us a bit of an overview as to where that testing is at?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That testing is still progressing. They are still doing that work, hence the money allocated in the budget.

Mr ODENWALDER: Can you be more specific? Can you tell me what quantum of the workforce has been tested and whether anyone is significantly at risk or injured? How many people are left to be tested?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As I outlined, it is still being progressed; I do not have the numbers at hand. I will endeavour to get some numbers. I am informed that the voluntary option to be tested is still open, so there might still be people who are going to come forward to be tested. That is still in place, and then we will be looking at the potential for a university study and have an investment in that to help.

Just to clarify, as I am informed, there are a couple of studies going on. We are going to look at what involvement there is. Fundamentally, it is not known what PFAS is, does or how it works. It is not definitive in nature so, whilst we are aware of what is happening, there is no conclusive evidence. I am informed that there are studies going on and that we will look to dovetail into those.

Mr ODENWALDER: Are you satisfied, minister, that the Largs North Fire Station is now safe for personnel to return to?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The investigation is still ongoing around Largs North.

Mr ODENWALDER: When will personnel return there?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The investigation is still ongoing, so I do not have—

Mr ODENWALDER: When do you expect the investigation to be complete?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The investigation is still ongoing. I do not have the definitive date.

Mr ODENWALDER: You do not have a definitive date. Is it going to be this year?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The investigation is still ongoing. I cannot speak for the experts. I would not want to guess at what their findings are, where they are going and what is happening. It would be silly of me to guess when I am not the expert. I am not actually doing the science. I am not the scientist. I will leave that to them to determine, and they will do those investigations. Once those investigations are done, then we will take the steps forward from there, but I would not like to just take a stab in the dark and have a guess at those things.

Mr ODENWALDER: Have you read the report entitled 'PFAS exposure pathways assessment: Largs North Fire Station', which was commissioned by the MFS and prepared by Melbourne fire brigade commander Mick Tisbury?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That report went to the MFS.

Mr ODENWALDER: I know it went to the MFS; I am just asking if you have read it.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It went to the MFS.

Mr ODENWALDER: So you have not read it?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It did not come to me: it went to the MFS.

Mr ODENWALDER: So you have not seen it?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It went to the MFS.

Mr ODENWALDER: This is a yes or no answer. You are not on the radio now. Answer the question: have you read it or not?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It went to the MFS. I cannot be any clearer.

Mr ODENWALDER: Why can you not say no?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I cannot be any clearer. It went to the MFS.

Mr ODENWALDER: You can be clearer: you could say yes or no.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It went to the MFS.

Mr ODENWALDER: Okay. When did you become aware of this report? It was delivered to the MFS on 27 February, as I am advised.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am just thinking about dates. I would have to go back and check my briefings with the chief of the MFS. I would have to check on dates and timing because I do not have my diary in front of me to that level.

Mr ODENWALDER: Do you want to take that on notice?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, I will have a look at that. If I can give you a more fulsome answer, I will.

Mr ODENWALDER: Thank you. As the minister, have you taken any action on the central recommendation of that report that the MFS strongly consider permanently decommissioning the Largs North Fire Station?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I think I made it clear earlier that the investigations are still going on. A number of reports have been done. Scientists are doing a body of work around this, and that is still being investigated. Are you talking specifically about Largs North?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, scientists have done work. There have been a number of investigations, as far as I am aware. That body of work is still ongoing and that investigation is still continuing, so I will wait for the outcome of that work.

Mr ODENWALDER: Have you seen any other completed reports, or are you waiting for everything to be done and then something comprehensive will arrive on your desk to review? Is that what you are saying?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am waiting for all the investigations to finish and all the scientific work to be done. I think I outlined before that I am not a scientist at that level, whilst I do have a science degree.

Mr ODENWALDER: You do not have to show me your degree.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: You were a police officer; you know how it goes. You raised that one, and I appreciate that.

Mr ODENWALDER: I have a degree too.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What was that in? Not science.

Mr ODENWALDER: No, not science—definitely not science. The Largs North Fire Station brigade are now temporarily housed at Fort Largs; is that right?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is correct.

Mr ODENWALDER: In the old section or the new section, if you understand what I am saying. Is it in the abandoned section?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The abandoned section? No. Are you talking about the Police Academy?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes. Are they sharing facilities with the Police Academy?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am told yes. The Police Academy does not always use that facility, as far as I am aware, therefore they have it for the bulk of the time. As far as I am informed, they are using the new area—not the abandoned area, as you pointed out—of the Police Academy. They are based and stationed there.

Mr ODENWALDER: Is there any cost incurred across agencies for that arrangement, or is that just a gift of the police department?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that the police do charge for the use of the facility.

Mr ODENWALDER: How much?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I have been advised to take that on notice. I do not have that dollar figure in front of me, but I will endeavour to get that number and get it to you.

Mr ODENWALDER: That money is coming out of the MFS budget into the police budget for the foreseeable future until you decide that Largs North is—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will take that on notice. I am not entirely sure of the breakdown of the arrangement. Again, I am led to believe that, early on, SAPOL and the police commissioner were very helpful in allowing this to happen, and then an arrangement—

Mr ODENWALDER: They get paid for it.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry?

Mr ODENWALDER: They are very helpful and they get paid for it.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I think that they were actually helpful from the get-go. I am not sure when the cost sharing occurred, and I am not sure whether the cost is around, for example, linen, electricity, water supply, etc. I do not know whether that is the cost or whether there is a charge, but I will have a look at that and come back to you with some numbers once I can ascertain exactly what they are.

Again, it is early days, early stages, of this. They moved in and I am not sure whether they were charged right from the get-go or whether a deal was struck a little bit later down the track. I am not sure. I will look into this, as I have outlined, about whether it was just to cover costs or whether there is a charge involved as well. I will have a look at that for you.

Mr ODENWALDER: I appreciate your bringing all that back. Thank you, minister. I appreciate what you said before about waiting for the studies to be completed before you make any decision about the fire station itself. Has there been any forward planning, any contingency planning, should the Largs North Fire Station not be operable? Has any work been done into identifying any other sites?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Fundamentally, because the investigation is still ongoing, that is what we need to get the information around first. We know that it is an expanding area. There is a lot happening over on the peninsula; it is very, very exciting. However, the investigation is still ongoing and we just do not know where that is going to land, so until we know that detail it is hard to look a long way into the future.

Mr ODENWALDER: There would be some level of planning, surely, because, as you have stated, at some point in the future a report is going to land on your desk without warning and you will not have considered these issues at all because they are all in these studies that are ongoing.

The report is going to land on your desk possibly saying that Largs North is no longer a desirable place to house a fire station, and then the planning will start to get a new fire station and in the meantime they will continue this cost-sharing arrangement at Fort Largs; is that right?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I appreciate what you are saying. Again, I stress the point that we are waiting for the investigation but, with respect to one element and across all agencies, contingencies are put in place. Perhaps the example you have raised is a really good one: this ability to work in with SAPOL and to utilise the facility that is there at the academy for this scenario, which no-one would have known was going to unfold. Across all agencies, they do a great job putting those contingencies in place, so I have no doubt that forward planning is going on, futureproofing is going on. All that stuff—

Mr ODENWALDER: But you are not aware?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: —would always be considered. However, to that end, my focus is on the investigation and waiting for the outcome of that, but whether or not other works have been done would sit with the agencies, and I have every confidence that they would be having a look at those things, having futureproofing in place and planning for decades to come.

We have just invested significant money in the last budget for a new emergency services centre, and, again, in this budget from a SAPOL perspective in their communication centre because of the concerns going forward around a report that came out around earthquakes and the like. This sort of thinking is always happening through the agency, and I have every confidence that they are doing that work.

Mr ODENWALDER: We will get onto the emergency services headquarters, then, I think.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What Budget Paper?

Mr ODENWALDER: Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 67. Before we do, did you say before that Mr Lane's remuneration was on the departmental website, the Office of the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment's website?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is what I am led to believe. It is outlined on the DPC website, I am led to believe. All that information has to be tabled. But I think you asked me to go away and get that formation to you, which I am happy to do.

Mr ODENWALDER: So you are saying that must be supplied publicly? Humour me; I have never been the minister. The chief executive's renumeration must be published on this website; is that right?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As far as I am led to believe, all executive contracts at that level are tabled in the annual reports of the agencies; they are tabled there and henceforth put up online. That is what I am led to believe, that they are tabled as such in the annual reports and they are put online. If it is not online, as I outlined before, I am happy to go away and get the details for you. I am not sure of the timing of when they go online. I must say, I am scientist not a computer expert.

Mr ODENWALDER: No, but you are a minister. Do you know whether there is a statutory obligation for you to ensure that is on the website?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I would have to check that. Again, I know they are tabled. I will go away and check.

Mr ODENWALDER: What do you mean 'tabled'?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Tabled in the annual report. I think I outlined that. As far as I am aware, the chief executive officer has their salary put in the annual report. As I mentioned a few moments earlier when you asked the question, I am happy to go away and get that information for you and get it back to you, no problem at all. My apologies; I have just been advised that it is not tabled in the annual report. I will look to see where it does go and get that information for you.

Mr ODENWALDER: As of today, it does not appear to be on the website, but I will leave that with you to get an answer back to the committee.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No problem at all. As I said when you asked the question back at the start, I am happy to take that on notice and get the information for you.

Mr ODENWALDER: Also, if you could clarify whose responsibility it is to make sure that it is on that website, whether it is the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment, whether it is you or whether it is the agency CE.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes; it is a very fair point, too, and I will take that on board and take that on notice and get that information and get it back to you. Having a number of chiefs, especially in this portfolio, the chief executive of SAFECOM and the three fire chiefs—

Mr ODENWALDER: Too many chiefs? Is that what you are saying?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No. I will get that information and let you know how that is tabled, reported, and give you all that detail, as requested.

Mr ODENWALDER: I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 67, which talks about the joint emergency services headquarters, the control centre. Are we talking about the same thing if we talk about control centre?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Can you confirm the total cost of the headquarters over the forward estimates? I think it is just over $14 million, if I am reading this right.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Just to clarify, you are talking about the $14.178 million that is outlined in the budget papers?

Mr ODENWALDER: That sounds about right, yes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I think you may have referenced or looked at last year, where there was no figure attached. Is that something that you had flagged externally to here?

Mr ODENWALDER: I do not know what you are talking about. What do you mean 'flagged externally to here'?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Just to clarify it, there was no figure put in the budget last year because, going to tender, you do not put a figure in the budget from the point of view of not wanting to let people know what you are willing to pay. It sets the price, and you do not want to do that. So those works have begun. The figure there is the capital contribution that has been estimated from DPTI, if I am correct, as far as the contribution towards the new state emergency service headquarters.

Mr ODENWALDER: Can you clarify what you meant by 'flagged externally to here'?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I thought you had mentioned something in the media somewhere.

Mr ODENWALDER: Mentioned something where, sorry?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: In the media somewhere.

Mr ODENWALDER: I have not spoken publicly about this since October last year, I think.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Then I was misled, unless you said something in October last year.

Mr ODENWALDER: So you made a mistake when you said that something had been flagged externally to here?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, I thought you might have raised this issue in the media, but if you have not that is fine.

Mr ODENWALDER: What made you think that?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I may have read something, that you talked about—

The CHAIR: Minister and member for Elizabeth—

Mr ODENWALDER: It is an important point—

The CHAIR: We will get back on track, I think, with our budget line questioning.

Mr ODENWALDER: Okay; that is fine. Given all that—and I understand the minister's reasoning for last year's budget, even though I did not ask about it—if I understand the budget papers correctly there was $500,000 spent in the last financial year on this project.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that is the project cost, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: What was that spending on?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am told that was getting project managers, cost consultants, architects together to begin the works.

Mr ODENWALDER: And the $14.1 million odd, what exactly is that expected to be spent on?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that is the capital contribution for the fit-out to the building.

Mr ODENWALDER: It is a fairly specific amount. When do you expect this to be complete? When do the personnel move into this new fit-out and it is all completely operational?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed it is planned to be operational by September 2021.

Mr ODENWALDER: In the media last year you said August 2021. That is changed by a month.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: You are suggesting I said that? I do not have a recollection of what the quote was.

Mr ODENWALDER: It was in The Advertiser on Monday 22 October last year. You said the work would be complete by August 2021.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That could have been practical completion as opposed to transfer of personnel—

Mr ODENWALDER: So transfer of personnel will be complete by September?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Operational by 21 September I am informed.

Mr ODENWALDER: On page 67, what does the date of December 2022 mean? The date given for completion on page 67 of the budget papers is December 2022. I am not sure what that means, although I am sure there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for it.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that is from a budget perspective to financially close out the project. It is a financial reference to actually close it out.

Mr ODENWALDER: So the new headquarters will be fully operational by September 2021?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is the plan.

Mr ODENWALDER: The last time we spoke about this was by proxy in the media on 22 October last year, but can you tell me what the process has been in regard to the tender process since last year's budget? I understand there were five tenderers short-listed, from memory. Have you reached a point where you are starting to sign contracts and things?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What are the specifics of your question? You want to know how many—

Mr ODENWALDER: There were five tenderers short-listed in April, I understand, if my memory serves me correctly, April last year. I am wondering what has happened since then in the process towards the establishment of this new centre because we have not heard anything in the media or otherwise, as far as I am aware.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that there are four tenderers and that an evaluation process will take place over the coming weeks. As you would be aware, this is coordinated through DPTI.

Mr ODENWALDER: 'Over the coming weeks', so what is the end date? When will you decide and when will it become publicly available who the successful tenderer is?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That would be a matter for cabinet.

Mr ODENWALDER: Notwithstanding our toing and froing in the media, this has taken a while to get off the ground. Have any of your agency heads or VAs expressed any concern to you about the length of time it has taken?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: This was a project that was sitting around under the previous government—

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, I understand all that.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: —and talked about for years and years. We are actually getting on with the job and progressing it, so, no, not to my knowledge.

Mr ODENWALDER: To your knowledge, no chief officer has expressed any concern and no VA has expressed any concern to you?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, as I said, we are getting on with this job.

Mr ODENWALDER: No VA has expressed any concern about the length of time this has taken?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Not to my knowledge, no.

Mr ODENWALDER: Would you check and come back to the committee with an answer?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, if there is anything to report back, I will. Can I stress again that this was a project that did sit around under the previous government for years and years and no action was taken, so to be moving this forward is very good for the sector.

Mr ODENWALDER: In Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 35, in descriptions and objectives it mentions the Mount Barker CFS. I guess this crosses agencies because it is regarding the introduction of the retained—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, which line are you referring to?

Mr ODENWALDER: Page 35.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Is this in Agency Statements or Budget Measures?

Mr ODENWALDER: Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 35.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Which line?

Mr ODENWALDER: It is in descriptions and objectives. Sorry, that appears to be my mistake. Bear with me. Perhaps we will come back to that one. I go to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 48.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Was that the wrong page?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, I will come back to that. There must be an error in my paperwork, sorry. Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 48, which is the workforce summary. I understand from conversations I have had with both the previous chief and the current chief—and I wish he were here so I could congratulate him on his reappointment—about the pursuit of greater gender equity in recruitment within the MFS, that for various reasons the previous chief officer was not pursuing the same sort of fifty-fifty arrangement that the police commissioner is pursuing. I am wondering how that process is going and whether there is a formal gender parity objective.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will pass on your congratulations to the new chief when I see him. He will appreciate that.

Mr ODENWALDER: He is a good man.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell you is that there is focus in this area; you are right. There is an ageing population within the Metropolitan Fire Service—do not tell some of them that I said that. That is the fact and the organisation has identified that. They are actively engaged in improving the equity and diversity within the MFS. In fact, I noticed on social media, and I am sure you probably did as well, that there are some proactive pushes to make sure they do that. I will not speak for the chief, but I can say that it is something he is very conscious of and working very hard on as well.

I am also informed that this year there will be three courses of 24, up from 18, so that opportunity to bring in more people is something they are very focused on. As I was discussing before, from what we have seen on social media there is a focus on improving equity and diversity within the Metropolitan Fire Service, and management are focused on getting that balance right.

Mr ODENWALDER: I appreciate that you probably will not have these figures with you, but can you give me a gender breakdown across the organisation as at 30 June this calendar year and 30 June last year?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Just across genders?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am happy to get that for you. I will take that on notice and bring that information back for you.

Mr ODENWALDER: Can you shed any light on why the MFS would not take the approach that SAPOL have in terms of a fifty-fifty quota, for want of a better word? My cautious friend has reminded me that there is a 'target' within SAPOL, not a 'quota'.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The information I have been given, and as your esteemed colleague just talked about, if you set those sorts of quotas or targets, or whatever you want to call them, you are not necessarily getting people who are fully focused on wanting to do that job. That is a concern.

Whilst in the short term you will bring people in, if they are not passionate about the job and they do not want to stay in the job, there is a concern that they may come in for the short term and then fall out the back end. The advice is that, if we go and really push for people who are passionate about doing this role and want to do this role, they will be there long term. That is one of the key areas they are focused on, and a big part of their drive is finding people who want to do this work.

I have actually been out in the field and lucky enough to meet a number of MFS firies, obviously, as well as a number of the female MFS firies we have. They are really great advocates for this job and the lifestyle it can give, the opportunities it can give and the challenges it can give. That is a real strong message that I think is important, and I am informed that the chief is very focused on getting out there, sharing that and selling that.

In short, trying to make this a career path rather than just a job for a few years is a key focus, from the information I have been given from the MFS. I think it is a good thing to have that career path there for all people, and to be growing equity and diversity is a very positive outlook.

Mr ODENWALDER: Indeed. We are running out of time, so can I go to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 66, the Community Emergency Services Fund, administered items. Can you confirm that the Surf Life Saving helicopter rescue services are funded out of that fund?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, they do receive some funding through there.

Mr ODENWALDER: Has there been a review by SAFECOM or by any of your agencies into the helicopter rescue services, and what were the outcomes of that review?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: By my agencies, are you saying, or by SAFECOM?

Mr ODENWALDER: Well, SAFECOM is one of your agencies, isn't it?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: What were the outcomes of that review?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: There is no review by my departments.

Mr ODENWALDER: There has been no review into helicopter rescue services?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: There has been no review by SAFECOM or any of my departments.

Mr ODENWALDER: Not by SAFECOM?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Not by SAFECOM, no.

Mr ODENWALDER: Has there been a review by any external agency then?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: You would have to ask that agency, but not by SAFECOM.

Mr ODENWALDER: You are not aware of one?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Not by SAFECOM and not by my agencies.

Mr ODENWALDER: You are not aware of a review?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Not by my agencies that I am responsible for.

Mr ODENWALDER: So you are aware of a review, but not by SAFECOM?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Your question was—

Mr ODENWALDER: Was a review commissioned by any of your agencies, overseen by any of your agencies or reporting back to any of your agencies?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Your question is about my agencies.

Mr ODENWALDER: I just asked my question. That was a question.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Your question is about my agencies.

Mr ODENWALDER: No, I just asked a separate question: is there a review done by any external agency that will report back to any of your agencies, that has been commissioned by your agencies and will report back at any point or report back to you?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, I am just clarifying that your question was: has there been any review done by my agencies, and my response then is no.

Mr ODENWALDER: No, has there been a review done by any agency or any organisation—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: And I said you would have to ask those other agencies.

The CHAIR: I think, minister, we have moved to a further question, have we not, member for Elizabeth?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, if you like. Has there been a review conducted by any agency or any organisation that has been commissioned by one of your agencies or is instructed to report back to one of your agencies?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: If you are referring to my agencies that I am here speaking to, which was your initial question—

Mr ODENWALDER: This is a separate question then, minister. Answer the question.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: If you have a question for another agency, ask that agency.

Mr ODENWALDER: No, no, no,

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, yes, yes.

Mr BROWN: I might have a go.

The CHAIR: Member for Playford.

Mr BROWN: Have any of your—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Which budget paper and which budget line are you referring to?

Mr BROWN: The same one that my colleague was just referring to.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Which one is that, sorry?

Mr BROWN: Agency Statements, Volume 2, page 66, Community Emergency Services Fund. We have established that the rescue service is funded out of the Community Emergency Services Fund.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, the surf lifesaving aerial capability receives some funding out of the Community Emergency Services Fund.

Mr BROWN: So it does receive funding out of the fund; is that correct?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr BROWN: Have any of your agencies been consulted as part of a review of that service?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: A review of the surf lifesaving service? Not as far as I am aware.

Mr BROWN: Okay, thank you. It is good to get an answer.

The CHAIR: We have indeed reached 10.30am. There being no further questions, I declare the examination of the proposed payments for SAFECOM, the Emergency Services Levy Fund, the SA Country Fire Service, the SA Metropolitan Fire Service and the State Emergency Service to be completed.

Sitting suspended from 10:31 to 10:45.

Membership:

Hon. A. Piccolo substituted for Mr Brown.

Departmental Advisers:

Mr G. Stevens, Commissioner of Police, South Australia Police.

Mr S. Johinke, Director, Business Service, South Australia Police.

Mr I. Hartmann, Manager, Financial Management, South Australia Police.

Mr J. Teakle, Chief Inspector Governance and Capability Service, South Australia Police.

The CHAIR: The portfolio that we will be examining for the next two hours is South Australia Police. The minister appearing is the Minister for Police, Emergency Services and Correctional Services. Minister, I call on you to introduce your advisers and make a statement if you wish.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Thank you, Chair. I will not make a statement but I will introduce some people back to the table and new to the table. To my far left is Ian Hartmann, Manager, Financial Management, SAPOL. To my immediate left is Stephen Johinke, Director, Business Service, SAPOL. To my right is Commissioner Grant Stevens, and behind us is Jerome Teakle, Chief Inspector Governance and Capability Service at SAPOL.

The CHAIR: Member for Elizabeth, do you have a statement? If not, you can go straight to questions.

Mr ODENWALDER: I am happy to go to the budget. I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 183. We will start, as we traditionally do, with the workforce summary. Can you tell me, minister, on the latest figures, how many sworn police officer FTEs there were at 30 June last financial year?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes. The actual sworn workforce at 30 June 2019 was 4,701.6 FTEs active sworn. That includes sworn and community constables.

Mr ODENWALDER: That was 4,701?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Point 6, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: I think you have been making commitments, as the previous government did, that numbers would be maintained at 4,713 or more. Can you explain why that is not the case as at 30 June last year? We did have some discussion last year about how that is not a rolling average: that would be the figure at 30 June. Are you telling me the figure at 30 June was 12 FTEs below that?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that, in the calculation of these numbers, seven FTE specialist cybercrime positions have been put on, which have been agreed to with PASA; so that is an extra seven. The police commissioner has also put on an extra 15 FTE solicitors at his discretion using sworn salaries. They are sworn salaries. If you add them up, it is actually more than 4,713.

Mr ODENWALDER: Who are the solicitors? Are they sworn police officers?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, but they are using—

Mr ODENWALDER: So how do they contribute to the 4,713 figure?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am explaining why that number was not met. The police commissioner made the decision to use those positions for solicitors.

Mr ODENWALDER: There are 4,701 sworn police officers. What was the other figure—seven cybercrime? Who are they? Are they some sort of—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Specialist cybercrime.

Mr ODENWALDER: They are not sworn police officers?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No. They are civilians.

Mr ODENWALDER: Sorry?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Civilians, which again are agreed to. The seven positions are agreed to with PASA. It is a unique skill set, obviously.

Mr ODENWALDER: Agreed with PASA to make up the 4,713; is that what you are suggesting?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: That still only gets us to 4,708. Are you saying that there are then 15 civilian solicitors?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: You brought up an agreement with PASA. Is there some agreement with PASA about that figure, or is that an operational decision of the police commissioner?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That was a decision made by the commissioner to maintain necessary capability.

Mr ODENWALDER: At the expense of five operational police officers.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Do you expect this to be an ongoing situation where the numbers are consistently below 4,713 sworn police officers going forward?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: For sworn prosecutors, there has been a lack of interest in uptake of sworn members becoming prosecutors. The commissioner obviously has an obligation to meet prosecution needs. They are continuing to recruit in this space but, for a matter of service delivery, the commissioner has made this decision, and he has notified me and PASA accordingly.

Mr ODENWALDER: Has there been a net increase in total prosecutors, sworn and civilian?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No. It is the same establishment numbers, just a changing of the mix.

Mr ODENWALDER: What is the number of prosecutors in the system, sworn and civilian?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell you is that, as at 30 June 2019, SAPOL maintains an establishment of 201 full-time equivalent FTE police prosecutor positions. Of those 201, 179 are sworn police prosecutors supported by 22 unsworn prosecuting solicitors. Of the 179 sworn police prosecutor positions, including supervisory positions, 10 are currently vacant.

Mr ODENWALDER: Of the 179 there are 10 vacant positions, so 169 working; is that right? Am I understanding that right?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Of the total FTE positions.

Mr ODENWALDER: What was the figure last year? Do you have that here?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: There has been no increase in the total FTE.

Mr ODENWALDER: What about the total of sworn police prosecutors? Has that number changed? You said that there is a difficulty in recruiting to that position. As a secondary question, do you know what the problem is with recruiting to prosecution?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that in the 2018-19 budget the government provided $1.9 million, increasing to $2.5 million per annum from 2020-21 to fund the 22 unsworn solicitors to support the prosecution function. Funding enables replacement of the 22 sworn positions with prosecuting solicitors while maintaining the overall number of prosecutors.

Since the state government commitment to fund prosecuting solicitors, further staffing vacancies have arisen through natural attrition. Despite repeated efforts, there remains a lack of interest amongst sworn staff in pursuing a career as a police prosecutor. The lack of interest means that insufficient sworn staff are undertaking SAPOL prosecution training, creating an inability to keep pace with natural prosecutor attrition rates.

A lack of sworn prosecutors creates a workplace risk for existing prosecutors, given increased demand, at the same time impacting SAPOL's ability to service the criminal justice sector and community in South Australia.

Mr ODENWALDER: My question was: why? Do we know why sworn police officers are not taking positions in prosecution? Is there some sort of feedback within the organisation that lets people know why?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will let the commissioner give you a brief on this one.

Cmmr STEVENS: Thank you, minister. This has been a continuing trend for some years, where we have struggled to find suitable applicants registering their interest for the prosecution function. We attribute that to the fact that, in the initial stages of recruitment for policing, we have a generic profile of a general duties officer that we recruit against, and after some time we seek people to move into that prosecution stream.

I think that it is reasonably arguable that it is a different profile in terms of the nature of the person or skill set that we are looking for. Historically, the course has been about 24 or 26 weeks long—quite an intensive course—and, by virtue of the impact it has on a person's pay structure and family commitments, that has always been a challenge. We have sought to reduce the length of the course from that significant duration to about 14 weeks, and we have also introduced payments that provide some stability of remuneration for people who are undertaking the course prior to getting a prosecutor's position.

We have also identified that there are increasing levels of complexity in the Magistrates Court environment, where police officers serve as prosecutors, and this is not something that is necessarily attractive to people who may be interested in pursuing a career in the prosecution stream. They are the predominant reasons. We are continuing to address that as much as we can.

However, there is an obligation to the justice portfolio for us to provide a prosecution function. In order to meet that obligation, as has been stated, the government funded us for the additional 22 civilian prosecutors and for transferring those police positions to front-line policing positions. Notwithstanding that, we have still seen a continuing decrease in the level of interest from police officers to undertake the prosecution function.

As a result of that, I made a determination that I needed to approve the employment of additional civilian prosecutors so we could meet our obligations and service the court and, in accordance with that, also reduce the level of workplace stress on the substantive prosecutors who were obligated to take on more work as a result of the vacant positions.

Mr ODENWALDER: I will not stray off topic too much. Operationally, is there always a sworn police officer prosecutor assigned to a file, or are they of essentially equal rank with the civilian solicitors, if you understand what I mean?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed the civilian solicitors are doing exactly the same job as police prosecutors, so it is the same job.

Mr ODENWALDER: Since you brought up negotiations with PASA, have they expressed a view to you about the increasing civilianisation of the prosecution service?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: No? No discussion at all?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: Has there been any discussion within the organisation or with your office at all regarding the complete civilianisation, or the possibility of the complete civilianisation, of prosecution?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: Has been any discussion at all about the outsourcing or privatisation or civilianisation of any other aspect of police work?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am told that money was put forward and a proposition was put forward to the previous government to do some civilianisation of some of the police force, but that was subsequently removed.

Mr ODENWALDER: Sorry? Propositions were brought to the previous government by whom? By SAPOL?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: By the police commissioner, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: What were they?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am told analysts, custody positions and 000 call-taking were the three groups that were put to the previous government.

Mr ODENWALDER: Getting back to this figure, even given the arrangement with PASA to accept the seven cybercrime positions (is what I am understanding) on top of 4,701, that still leaves us with 4,708. Do you concede, then, that you have not met your stated target of 4,713 this financial year?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I think we discussed this last year as well. To elaborate on that, because it is not an exact science—and I think we went down this path last year—because you are juggling recruitment and attrition, you cannot foresee how many people might retire at the end of a year. You can have a best-case estimate and you recruit against that, but should people above that number decide to step away from the force for whatever reasons—they might choose early retirement, they might get a better job offer, or whatever it might be—you could end up getting a bigger number of people that step away than you allocated to recruit.

Likewise, when you allocate your recruits, no-one is forced to stay through the course if personal decisions change. You know personally that something personal might come up and you might decide to leave the force at some stage. People leave during the course as well, so it is not an exact science. We refer back to the numbers but, as I pointed out here, if you allow for the seven cybercrime specialists and the 15 solicitors, the adjusted target is 4,691. I think the number was 4,701, so we actually exceeded that target. If you take off the 15 solicitors the commissioner has just discussed, and the seven cybercrime specialists we talked about, the total comes to 4,691 and the number we talked about on 30 June 2019 was 4,701.6.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I should know this, but I do not. In terms of the civilian prosecutors, are they on the same pay structure as sworn police officers, and do they have a rank?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am told they are employed as LE3s, and there are different conditions under their award. They are on a different award.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Putting aside the other conditions, is the pay structure equivalent to sworn police officers or do they get paid less or more?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: They are LE3s. That is a different pay structure, yes.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: How does that compare to sworn police officers in the prosecution unit?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not have the numbers for LE3s. I am happy to get that for you, but they are LE3s.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I might put it this way: do civilian prosecutors cost the service less?

The CHAIR: I take it, member for Light, that we are still referencing workforce summary, page 183? Just for the record.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: That is correct; sorry, Chair. You are quite right to bring that to my attention.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not have those numbers, but I am happy to take that on notice and get those numbers for you.

Mr ODENWALDER: I will leave this line of questioning shortly, I promise. The 4,731 figure, has that been achieved as an average across the last financial year? No matter how we dress it up, the sworn figure as at 30 June was 4,701. We can add on an extra seven by negotiation with PASA, as you say, and that gives us 4,708—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Plus the 15 as the commissioner outlined.

Mr ODENWALDER: Was that as a result of a negotiation with PASA as well?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The commissioner sought to negotiate with PASA, but he did inform PASA, as I said previously, and he informed me of that decision.

Mr ODENWALDER: The question stands then: what was the average sworn police officer FTE number across the financial year? I appreciate that you may not have the average there with you. That does not include the cybercrime and does not include the 22 solicitors.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As I outlined in the previous answer, it fluctuates depending on who—

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, but what is the average?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The average for—

Mr ODENWALDER: The average number of sworn police officers over the financial year. I appreciate that you may not have that figure with you right now.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not have that detail here. It is not actually calculated to an average; it is calculated to 30 June. There is a target at 30 June. That is not calculated along the way, an average.

Mr ODENWALDER: Through the questions on notice process you provide me with figures month by month. I concede that I have not been diligent every month in collecting those figures but presumably you have end of month figures, so what would be the average?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, they are not calculated as such. You would have to go back and calculate them—

Mr ODENWALDER: That is right—you would have to calculate them; I appreciate that. Will you go away and calculate them and bring back an answer, please?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am told that if you would like us to calculate an average we can go away and do that.

Mr ODENWALDER: Sorry?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes; we can go and calculate that for you. It is not done as part of daily operations—

Mr ODENWALDER: I appreciate that.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I may not have been clear, I apologise. It is not done as part of routine, an average calculated.

Mr ODENWALDER: Is it your expectation that that average figure would be 4,713 or more?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I think this goes back to the response I gave a few moments ago, which was: if in one month a number of people retire, you do not know whether they are going to retire in January or November, or when a cadet course comes online and when they graduate—that will have a kick, obviously. It does fluctuate, and that is why the calculation is not done like that—because there is that fluctuation across the board.

Mr ODENWALDER: Can you give me a figure of how many sworn police officers are currently non-operational? How many of those 4,701 FTEs are non-operational; that is, they are injured, they are on lighter duties or they are suspended for some reason, perhaps?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The figure of 4,701 is full-time, active sworn.

Mr ODENWALDER: Active, as in?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The figure of 4,701 is full-time, active sworn.

Mr ODENWALDER: Given that figure is the active sworn, what is the total sworn, including those who are non-operational, injured, suspended or on light duties?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: At 30 June, there were 101.6 sworn inactive members. So there is the 4,701 and there is the 101.6 inactive sworn.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Supplementary: how does that compare with last year at the same time?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that we do not have those figures here, but I will take that on notice.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Thank you.

Mr ODENWALDER: Minister, do you currently have a SAPOL ministerial liaison officer working in your office?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, when you—

Mr ODENWALDER: Do you have a SAPOL MLO in your office?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, I have an MLO in my office who looks after police.

Mr ODENWALDER: As employed by SAPOL?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, the MLO in my office is part of my team. They are not substantive. Is that what you are asking: where are they substantive, or where do they originate from?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, they are not from SAPOL.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: On the same question, when you say they are not from SAPOL, are they another long-term public servant, or were they appointed upon you becoming minister?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, they are employed by my office. I think there might have been a change in the operational set-up from previously. They are employed by my office.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: So it is essentially a political employment.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, they are a public servant.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Were they previously a public servant? That was the question I asked.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I would have to check what their previous employment was. They have come into this role, and I honestly do not know whether they were a public servant or not.

Mr ODENWALDER: You do not know whether they were a—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Whether they were previously a public servant or not.

Mr ODENWALDER: You do not know whether they were previously a public servant?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, I do not.

Mr ODENWALDER: Will you take that on notice?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, if it is appropriate that I report that back. I am not sure—

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I am not asking for their name or their age or anything like that.

Mr ODENWALDER: I want to know—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Actually, I apologise: I have just been informed that she was previously a public servant.

Mr ODENWALDER: In which agency?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not know, but not SAPOL.

Mr ODENWALDER: But she is the SAPOL ministerial liaison officer, or does she share a portfolio responsibility with other agencies?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Her role is—

Mr ODENWALDER: To liaise with SAPOL.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Why would you not get someone from SAPOL to liaise with SAPOL? Would that not make more sense? I understand that was how the previous government did it, generally.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No. We have a person who is very capable and does a very good job.

Mr ODENWALDER: I am sure. I am sure you do. I am just asking the question: why would someone from SAPOL not be a more appropriate fit for that job? It is not a trick question; I am just asking.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I know. I am informed that the previous person was an ASO3 level working up at an ASO6 level. It is a generic skill set. We have just applied the appropriate person to do that role.

Mr ODENWALDER: Previously, did you have someone from SAPOL in that role?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: When the office came across from the previous government, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: You had the same ministerial liaison officer. When did they leave?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not know the date.

Mr ODENWALDER: Roughly. Did they leave this calendar year, last calendar year, immediately after the election, last week?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I believe it was May 2018.

Mr ODENWALDER: May 2018?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes. I am informed that she went to the AGD's office.

Mr ODENWALDER: The Attorney-General's ministerial office?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No. To the A-G's Department. That is what I have been informed.

Mr ODENWALDER: What changes have taken place within the organisation since the Equal Opportunity Commission's report into sexual harassment, discrimination and predatory behaviour in SAPOL? I am sure you have that one.

The CHAIR: Member for Elizabeth, just for the record, can we have a page number and reference for that question?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, sorry. I am still on workforce summary—those people are presumably still part of the workforce—Volume 3, page 183.

The CHAIR: Just a different line of questioning?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes. I apologise if there is a more appropriate line, but I am sure the minister will be happy to expand on the success they have had in this area.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell you is that in 2016 the Equal Opportunity Commission conducted an independent review, the Sex Discrimination, Sexual Harassment and Predatory Behaviour in South Australia Police. Almost 2,000 SAPOL past and present employees participated in a confidential survey, with 53 staff participating in face-to-face interviews and five people providing written submissions to inform the review, which was published in November 2016.

The review found that the level of sexual harassment in South Australia Police over the previous five years was in line with the workplace prevalence in the general population; however, the degree of predatory behaviour was found to be higher. The EOC review report provided 38 recommendations for implementation by SAPOL, of which 27 have been fully implemented, two are currently being implemented, four are awaiting implementation and five are commenced and underway.

The EOC will publish its fourth and final monitoring report in February 2020. The project is expected to be completed by March 2020. Any costs relating to the implementation of the recommendations have been absorbed within existing SAPOL budget. The EOC is commissioned by SAPOL to independently monitor the implementation of the recommendations. Key changes that have occurred in the organisation as a result of the EOC review report include:

the development of a restorative engagement program;

the introduction of an 'if not, why not' approach to flexible working;

the establishment of a diversity and inclusion branch;

the introduction of breastfeeding/lactation break guidelines;

the development of SAPOL's inaugural Diversity and Inclusion Strategy and Gender Equality Action Plan; and

the development of an unconscious bias in selection, animation video for training purposes.

A project team operating under the name of Project Equitas will continue to implement the outstanding recommendations.

Mr ODENWALDER: Thank you. Finally, on workforce summary, I understand the commissioner's contract is due to expire in less than 12 months; is that right? I got a date of 20 July from somewhere.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The commissioner tells me it is 360 days.

Mr ODENWALDER: Excellent. Apart from just then, obviously, have you had any discussions with the commissioner about his possible reappointment to the role?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The commissioner's contract is with the Premier.

Mr ODENWALDER: That was not the question, though. Have you had any conversations with the commissioner about his ongoing employment?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The commissioner and I chat about everything all the time, but his contract sits with the Premier.

Mr ODENWALDER: You may chat about everything all the time, but have you chatted about that at any time?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, we have not had direct conversations, again, because it sits with the Premier.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: And the Premier will not seek your opinion or your advice?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: You would have to ask the Premier.

Mr ODENWALDER: I will change direction now. I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 185, Program 1: Public Safety. Part of the objective is police response and assistance, management and emergency response, management and coordination across the state. I want to ask about the country policing review.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What line are you referring to the country policing review?

Mr ODENWALDER: On page 185, under description/objective it says 'emergency response, management and coordination across the state', so I want to ask specifically about the country policing review.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell you is that a regional policing review is currently being undertaken examining the delivery of policing services in country South Australia, including the new APY lands staffing model to establish a stable yet flexible, cost-efficient and sustainable policing service on the APY lands.

Mr ODENWALDER: I have not asked a question yet. I was just pointing you to the budget line.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I thought you wanted an update.

Mr ODENWALDER: Last year, you announced a country policing review. To my knowledge, there has been no public resolution to that process.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, just to clarify, I did not announce a country policing review. The commissioner is doing a review, as he always does, but he has a country policing review, which I just talked about, and a regional policing review.

Mr ODENWALDER: Okay, but I did not hear the commissioner talk about it, I heard you talk about it, so in that sense you announced it in your role.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, that is not true. There is the Duggan review looking at overarching policing, which I am very happy to talk to, but the regional review, like when there was the metropolitan review—

Mr ODENWALDER: This is part of the same process as the district policing model, is it?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No. The actual country review that you are talking about was actually announced under your government, so that began then, the regional review. There was a city one done. As I just outlined, the commissioner is looking at the regional policing review. There may have been some miscommunication or misunderstanding in the media, and I am happy to outline the Duggan review. That was an election commitment we made, which we are fulfilling.

Mr ODENWALDER: We will talk about the Duggan review. I appreciate you trying to clarify the country policing review. It was referred to as the country policing review, and whether you call it a regional review or whatever—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Same thing, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Whoever announced it, has that review been completed, notwithstanding the APY lands, which we will get to?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The commissioner has advised me that he is expecting to receive further information on that review shortly.

Mr ODENWALDER: Has there been a rolling set of results from this review? Has anything been implemented as a result of this review before the final review, whether there is a report or something?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: So the consolidation of CIB services in the South-East, for instance, is not part of that review?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I apologise. I have just been informed that the commissioner has released some information about traffic policing in country areas for the workforce. That was a subset, I think we can call it, of this review, if you like, around traffic policing.

Mr ODENWALDER: The consolidation of CIB services in the South-East to Mount Gambier was not part of the review; that was a separate process?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It was a separate decision, the commissioner informs me.

Mr ODENWALDER: Is the minister aware of concerns in the South-East that this puts large towns, like Millicent and Bordertown, and surrounding smaller towns at unnecessary risk?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that the incumbent person in Millicent was actually residing in Mount Gambier, so they were travelling that distance anyway. The commissioner informs me that the new arrangement actually gives them a better capability to respond to crime.

Mr ODENWALDER: What about Bordertown?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What about Bordertown?

Mr ODENWALDER: My understanding from talking to people in Bordertown is that they no longer have a CIB presence. I am happy to be corrected.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As far as I am informed, no decision has been made on Bordertown.

Mr ODENWALDER: So there is still a CIB service in Bordertown?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The commissioner is not aware of that in Bordertown. From the advice he has given me, it is serviced by Naracoorte.

Mr ODENWALDER: Sorry?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It is serviced by Naracoorte. He is not aware of there being a CIB.

Mr ODENWALDER: Okay, so there is a CIB service in Naracoorte?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: As part of this regional review, country policing review, has there been any community consultation, or is it an internal review, a statistical review?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: There has been no community consultation at all?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Not as yet, no.

Mr ODENWALDER: Have you received any correspondence, or have you spoken to any disgruntled members of the community, about this review and about the results of some of this review or about the lack of consultation?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The commissioner has not received any recommendations at the minute, so there is nothing to consult on. There is nothing there. The recommendations have not been given to the commissioner so—

Mr ODENWALDER: No, the consultation is part of the process.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The consultation would be around the recommendations. There are no recommendations.

Mr ODENWALDER: So there will be community consultation once—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Consultation would be around recommendations, and that will transpire down the track, but there are no recommendations.

Mr ODENWALDER: So when there are recommendations there will be community consultation?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is the commissioner's intent: significant community consultation, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Significant community consultation, okay. Have you received or exchanged correspondence with the member for MacKillop regarding the reopening of Kalangadoo Police Station since the election?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Have I received written correspondence from the member for MacKillop about Kalangadoo?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I would have to check my files.

Mr ODENWALDER: Could you check and bring an answer back?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Along those lines, have you received or exchanged any correspondence with the member for MacKillop regarding the consolidation of CIB services in the South-East as well?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, could you ask that question again, please? Sorry, I missed it.

Mr ODENWALDER: Is there any correspondence with the member for MacKillop regarding the consolidation of CIB services in the South-East?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will take that on notice as well.

Mr ODENWALDER: And bring an answer back, thanks. You raised the APY lands police staffing and service delivery—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What page? What budget paper?

Mr ODENWALDER: Budget Measures Statement, part 2, page 73. We will start with the easy one. Can you provide me with an outline of the current model of the APY lands police staffing and then the model proposed to replace it? So in terms of police numbers, ranks, periods of stay, and whether they live there or are fly-in fly-out.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, can you—

Mr ODENWALDER: I just want police numbers on the lands, whether they are permanently stationed there in both scenarios—in the current model and the one to replace it—and their ranks. I appreciate that there is some detail you might not be able to provide.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, we had three questions in one; can you reframe that?

Mr ODENWALDER: What I want is the current model of the APY lands policing, the current model of staffing they have; the model proposed to replace it; and a breakdown of rank and that sort of thing, which you may need to take on notice.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will take that on notice; that is quite complex.

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, but you can compare the two models in rough terms, surely.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, with the complexity of that, I will take it on notice and get you the details. I am happy to do that.

Mr ODENWALDER: You cannot tell me about the model that is in the budget?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I can talk about the model in the budget, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: That would be good—and also how it replaces the current model so that we can have some sort of comparison. Why is it a good idea?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I can tell you that there are currently 23 sworn positions and 10 community constables through the APY lands. The new model has that number, but it will be a designated workforce allocated through the State Tactical Response Group. I think this is a very good new initiative. As you would be aware, policing on the lands has always been tough. Everyone has done an outstanding job in that area, but we need to make changes to progress this and do better.

The model that has been put forward is very much focused on a new Indigenous policing model and employment model for introduction throughout the region. The focus is on empowering trained community members to undertake a front-line community safety role within their communities. This new model will have an Indigenous focus to policing. Having been up there—have you been up there?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It is a fascinating place, as you would agree. The old model worked to a point but, to make changes, we think that this new Indigenous-focused policing model, developed by some people who have spent lots of time up on the lands, will have great community safety outcomes.

It is a new model, but we think that it will have very positive policing outcomes on the APY lands. Part of that is set up around having a multiagency base at Umuwa. We are working through that at the moment and excited about what that will bring. Again, I am not sure how much you know about Umuwa and the location, but it is colloquially referred to as the Canberra of the lands. It is the central point, I suppose.

We are looking at developing that and then, around the regions, developing these container stations. They are not really stations: they are facilities. What is there at the moment is quite poor. We will put these containers in place at the other locations: Fregon, Indulkana and Pipalyatjara as well. The intent is to get the containers there so that the police can come into those regions, spend more time in those remote areas and have that base to operate out of. This is an exciting model. It is a different model, but it is very much focused on Indigenous policing in that area.

Mr ODENWALDER: How does the Indigenous police service differ from the current community constable model?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The model is still being totally fleshed out, but it will empower the community to be more involved in their policing. The community constables on the lands (the member for Light would be aware of this) are hard positions to fill in the role as it is shaped. The intent is that this new model will bring more people into the policing model because filling the community constable roles as they stand is quite difficult. This new model will be able to bring the communities on board and have them play a more significant part in the policing of the area.

Again, I may be speaking to the converted and you have already seen it and already know. When you go up there, the way that the elders and leaders in the community lead their people in their regions, and the way that they are looked up to and respected, is unique, to say the least. Using that power and ability to work within the police in, again, a unique model is what we are looking to do. A lot of work has been done in this space by a lot of really good people in that area to help devise this model. It is very much focused around bringing the unique APY lands community into the model of policing so that they are a part of it as well and they are leading the charge, for want of a better term.

Mr ODENWALDER: The idea is that the Indigenous police service is drawn from people living on the APY lands and that perhaps community constables were not necessarily; is that the difference?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Can you just repeat the question?

Mr ODENWALDER: Is the difference that the Indigenous police service as you envision it is drawn from people who live on the lands, rather than from community constables imported from outside the lands? If there are 10 community constables already working there—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The community constables traditionally come from on the lands—

Mr ODENWALDER: They do?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: —yes—but we want to try to give them some greater powers to have a greater say in what is happening in their community. As I outlined before, just to clarify, it is not exactly as the community constables. That model, which is used all over the state, is not seeming to work on the APY lands. By modifying it, for want of a better term, or having a slightly different model in this region—as I was trying to explain before, and I may not have been clear enough and I apologise—and by bringing the communities in, it may not be specifically the community constable role as we have known it to be in the past. It may be a modified role because of the unique nature of the lands.

I have just been informed that they are using the working title 'community safety officer'. They will come in, which, again, is bringing the community into this role. I will just elaborate. The community safety officer concept will enable them to work in other fields as well. For example, what I have come to learn and the advice to me is that, when people live on the lands, if something needs to be done they get in and do it; if nothing needs to be done, the culture is just to say, 'We'll wait until something needs to be done.' It is a beautiful thing to see and witness. However, if these people are not fully engaged they will go and do something else.

One of the things that we can look at through this multiagency site at Umuwa is potentially having people do a few different roles. If the need is for one thing, then great, there is skill to do that. If the need is for driving the ambulance, then great, the community safety officer can do that. If the need is somewhere else, we can work with these different agencies. As I stressed before, the model we have had has done what it has done to now, but we think that, to be better, we need to expand it and go forward. This new model, I think, will be very exciting.

Mr ODENWALDER: So they will not have any extra authority? There will not be any need for legislative change to give them authorities that police officers have that the community constables currently do not have?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is being explored, but the look is to increase their responsibilities within their local communities.

Mr ODENWALDER: The current model is 23 sworn police officers. Are they permanently stationed on the lands? Forgive my ignorance.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that, yes, they are.

Mr ODENWALDER: So there are 23 sworn, permanent police officers up there. Are those positions full? There are 23 sworn police officers there now?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that notwithstanding absences for sick leave, maternity leave or whatever it might be, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: What about the 10 community constable positions; are they full?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: This is further to the conversation we have been having, and I notice the member for Light has an interest here, having covered this area before. I stress that it is a fascinating area, and it is why we are looking at this new model. The answer to your question is that there are 10 FTE traditional community constable positions on the APY lands.

Despite continued efforts by SAPOL to fill all the positions, four are currently filled. Current recruitment strategies throughout the APY lands include client targeting, advertising locally through community stores and administrative services, school visits and visits to other employment locations to entice staff to SAPOL. I am also informed that there are four, and one on long-term sick leave as well.

Further to the point I was making before—and SAPOL outlined here how it is targeting recruits and targeting to get people in—it becomes a bit of a battle, if you like. If someone is really good, SAPOL wants them for its community constable role, but then Health might want them, Education might want them, and other groups might want them. What we are looking at here is how we can get someone who has that capability that we can actually share across the agencies and get a better return and give them a better skill set, extra education and development in that area as opposed to having the other agencies wanting to poach these people from one another.

Mr ODENWALDER: There are 23 sworn, permanently stationed police officers there at present. How many will be there and permanently stationed after the implementation of this model?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed there will be the same level of policing presence. The idea is for those 23 to roll over into the new model, at least those 23 positions. However, the same level of policing presence is assured there on the lands.

Mr ODENWALDER: Sorry, just say that again. The 23 positions will stay there; is that right?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No. The same level of policing will be assured on the lands, and those 23 positions will roll over into the new model. Potentially, more will be, in this new model, working through the lands and delivering the service on this land, but the policing presence will stay the same.

Mr ODENWALDER: What do you mean by 'the policing presence'? The total number of people doing some sort of police work; is that what you mean?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is the intent, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: But there is no guarantee it will be the same number of sworn police officers?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It may not be the same people. It will be—

Mr ODENWALDER: I am not saying 'people'. I am talking about whether there will be 23 sworn police officers there.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The same level of policing, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: So there will be at least 23 sworn police officers on the lands at any given time; is that what you are saying? I am not being funny; I am just trying to figure out what you are saying.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What the commissioner is telling me is that, yes, there is a guarantee of the same service. The point I am trying to make—and I am not trying to be tricky either; I am just trying to clarify here—is if someone is off sick, for example, and they stay in Adelaide—

Mr ODENWALDER: I am not trying to be tricky either. It sounds like a perfectly reasonable model. I am just trying to get to the bottom of it.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The point I am trying to make, just to clarify and again not be tricky either, is that at the moment, for example, if someone comes down on their weeks off, or whatever it might be, and they get sick and do not go up, they are not replaced, if that makes sense. In effect, the lands are down a person or two if two people were sick or whatever it might be.

In this new model, if someone is sick, that is fine; someone else just rotates and goes and takes their place so there will always be that presence, as we have talked about. We are aiming to maintain the same numbers. But if you are sick one week, they would be down a person up there because you would not go up on your roster; whereas, if you are sick this week, the member for Light will come in and—

The Hon. A. Piccolo interjecting:

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Okay, not the member for Light, the member for Napier. Does that make sense?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I refer to the same budget line, as there will be questions. To clarify—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, which one was that again?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: What was the budget line you were using for the questions you just asked?

The CHAIR: Were we on page 73, APY lands staffing model? Is that where we are?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: That is correct. I have a couple of questions to clarify because I am not as familiar with the topic as my colleague. In terms of the new model, the community safety officers—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Community safety officers, yes.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: —I understand they will be sworn police officers.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The intent is that they are the replacement of the community constables. If I have not been clear I am happy to explain it again.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I am happy for you to do that.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The idea is to replace community constables. I read out the figures before, and I think you probably personally experienced this same problem. When you are in the role of getting people to do those jobs and they are not being filled, it is hard to find those target people. By changing the role, as we are looking at doing with this model, it will replace fundamentally those community constables and it will create a new role.

Can I stress the point—and correct me if I am wrong, commissioner—it will be unique to these lands because the lands are unique. What we are saying is that it is not a one-size-fits-all model. Community constables work really well, and you have seen them in Port Lincoln, Ceduna and even in the city as well. We think it is a really good model, but we have identified that the lands are different. We are going to go with a different model to get better engagement with the community exactly and bring the community into that more. Does that make sense? The new community safety role will fundamentally replace—

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Just to make sure that my understanding is correct, minister, at the moment you basically have 10 positions that are normally community constables that will now be transferred or reformed into community safety officers; is that correct?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: We have not determined the number. That is being worked out through the model. There could be more. Because it is a different role—

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: At least 10?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, but because it is a different role we are hoping it might attract more people.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: You are saying at least 10. At the same time in the APY lands you are having at least 10 community safety officers and you will have at least 23 sworn officers; is that correct?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, the equivalent of. It is a growing model.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: In terms of the existing community constables who will now become community safety officers, will their policing role change or will they just have additional duties attached to their new position?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Can you just explain that one again? I missed that.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Their role, as it is currently performed, is essentially a policing role. You mentioned that you want to broaden that to other agencies and work they could do with other agencies—which I understand, that is fine. To achieve that will their policing role be changed or will you actually make the role broader to incorporate other tasks?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Their roles will be made broader so that we can fully engage them. Sometimes people start in these roles and, if you like, it is not stimulating enough, there are quiet times and they will go and look for other things. We want to make this a more engaging model for them.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: What, if any, implications are there for these new community safety officers in terms of pay and conditions?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is being worked through at the moment. We are very conscious of that, and we are doing that work as we speak.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: When do you anticipate these new roles will be put in place?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Part of this model will be up and running by 2020/21, but there is a fair bit of work to be done between now and then to work through the exact things we have been discussing and I have been sharing with you in the context of the model being fleshed out, which I hope you appreciate. We see some great opportunities to enhance the model to deliver a better model up there. As I said, some people have put some really good work into this.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: To refresh my memory, are community constables—soon to be community safety officers—covered by PASA in terms of membership?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am not sure about whether they sit with PASA or not. I am happy to follow that up and ask whether community constables—

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I assume that if they did there are negotiations taking place with PASA at the moment?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That would all be part of this negotiation as we go forward, yes, but I cannot answer the question on community constables.

Mr ODENWALDER: On the same line, just to finish off—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I can actually give an answer on the inactives you asked about before; that information has just come through, if you would like it. Would you like that answer on the questions you were asking about the inactives as of 30 June 2018? Sworn inactives as of 30 June 2018 are 99.2 FTEs. That was in answer to the question you asked earlier that I took on notice, but that answer has come through.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: So it has gone up. It is different from 106.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, are you happy with that response? If I get another one through in a second I will give it to you as well. The advances of mobile technology; it helps, doesn't it?

Mr ODENWALDER: Just finishing off on the APY lands police staffing, I gather you have not settled on a final model yet, but has consultation started taking place with, for instance, the APY Executive, the general manager, the ALRM, the Aboriginal Health Council, those types of organisations?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that there has been ongoing consultation in this process. I cannot be specific and say all the ones you have just mentioned, but there has been ongoing consultation.

Mr ODENWALDER: Can you take that on notice—the APY Executive, the APY general manager, the ALRM, the Aboriginal Advisory Council and the Aboriginal Health Council?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: I refer to the same budget line to clarify and finalise in terms of the proposed community safety officers. Will they continue to be employees of SAPOL, or will they be employees of another agency, and what will be the reporting lines?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The intent is that they will be employees of SAPOL, yes. The reporting line to the other agencies will have to be worked through in the model.

Mr ODENWALDER: I want to go to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 189. The very last sentence is about continued partnership with the community through watch groups. I assume that is Neighbourhood Watch, Business Watch, those groups.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: My starting point is: under the new district policing model or otherwise, is the commitment from SAPOL still to the same level of support for those groups?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Including Neighbourhood Watch? Is there the same level of support for Neighbourhood Watch?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: It is my understanding that at least one Neighbourhood Watch group has been prevented from using the words 'neighbourhood watch' on their social media sites, that is, their Facebook and Twitter sites. It seems to me that in the current environment we should be reaching out via social media and promoting these types of groups through social media, perhaps more than in any other type of medium.

It is my understanding that at least one group has had a letter from a police officer (I will not name him, but he is in a position to coordinate these things) who emailed the local area coordinator of a Neighbourhood Watch group on 29 March, saying:

Neighbourhood Watch is a SAPOL crime prevention program and its brand includes the program logo…and the words 'Neighbourhood Watch'.

Control of copyright of this brand is retained by SAPOL…

To protect the SAPOL…brand…branding elements shall not be affixed to any brochure or other publication including websites and Facebook pages without the approval of a police officer.

…at this time SAPOL does not endorse individual Neighbourhood Watch areas having their own Facebook page.

Is this a policy that you agree with?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I understand what you are saying. I do not have the specifics in front of me, but I am led to believe that it was not being used in accordance with how SAPOL do that. I am happy to take that on notice and have a look further for you if you so wish.

Mr ODENWALDER: It would be great if you could take it on notice in a general sense, just to clarify the policy. The policy appears to be that you cannot use the Neighbourhood Watch logo or the words 'neighbourhood watch' on a social media site or any other publication without the express permission of a police officer.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that, historically, this has not been a problem. The advice I have is that the way this was going to be used had raised some concerns and that SAPOL looked at it from that perspective but without the detail.

Mr ODENWALDER: Which concerns?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am also informed that it is the only occasion that SAPOL is aware of this happening.

Mr ODENWALDER: Really? What were the concerns?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not have those specifics, as I pointed out earlier. That is the advice.

Mr ODENWALDER: You do not know what the concerns were; you just know there were concerns about this particular group using the words 'neighbourhood watch' and so they were sent this email advising them of this policy?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is correct: I do not know what the concerns were.

Mr ODENWALDER: Could you come back to the committee with a more fulsome response as to what the concerns were?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am happy to have a look at that, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: While you are at it, could you clarify the manner in which a police officer can grant approval—must approval be written, can such approval be given by any police officer at any time, or must it be a police officer who is allocated to a particular group? How does this policy exist in the framework of these things? Is it a general order?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Can you split that into two questions? I think there are a couple of questions in there.

Mr ODENWALDER: I was giving them to you on notice.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is good, thank you. Can you clarify the ones on notice?

Mr ODENWALDER: The manner in which a police officer grants approval—must it be written, can it be given by any police officer, or must it be a particular police officer assigned to a group? Then another question, which if you could answer now would be helpful, is: where does the policy sit in the framework of policy? Is it a general order? It is not a regulation, is it? Who makes that decision and how is it expressed?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will take that on notice and get clarification back to you.

Mr ODENWALDER: Still on the same line, sir, are you aware of a letter dated 15 April and sent to all Neighbourhood Watch groups by Mr Phil Tavender, the President of the Neighbourhood Watch Volunteers Association, discouraging discussion of the Liberal government's cut to Crime Stoppers funding on the ground that it could be seen as taking a political stance, which contrasts with the requirement that 'you are to remain apolitical at all times'?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, I missed the start of that. Could you repeat it?

Mr ODENWALDER: Are you aware of a letter from Mr Phil Tavender, the President of the Neighbourhood Watch Volunteers Association, dated 15 April, sent to all groups discouraging discussion of the Liberal government's cut to Crime Stoppers?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Not to my recollection, no.

Mr ODENWALDER: You are not aware of this letter?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, not to my recollection.

Mr ODENWALDER: Did you or anyone in your office speak to or correspond with Mr Tavender regarding this correspondence either before or after it was sent?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, I did not and, to the best of my knowledge, no-one else has. You are asking: had that direction or spoken to him about that?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, not to my knowledge.

Mr ODENWALDER: Could you get an answer and come back to the committee?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, I am happy to do that.

Mr ODENWALDER: Is it your general view that Neighbourhood Watch groups should be prohibited from discussing policy issues, such as government funding for Crime Stoppers?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No. Neighbourhood Watch groups do a fantastic job in our community and they are free to discuss whatever they like. I am happy to work with them. I was actually at their awards last year, and some of the people and the work they do in the community is outstanding. They do a great job.

Mr ODENWALDER: So it is your view that they should not be prohibited from discussing any policy issues?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I cannot think why they would not be free to discuss whatever they wanted. I am not sure if there is anything in their charter. I do not know the detail of how they operate, as in at that charter level, or whether they have anything like that written in there that I am not aware of. To the best of my knowledge, they would be discussing all issues within their community to keep their community safe.

Mr ODENWALDER: As an organisation, how are they constituted? Clearly, they are independent of SAPOL. Are they an incorporated body? Do they make their own rules, or are they guided in some way? Clearly, they are guided in some way because they are guided in terms of their Facebook profile and those sorts of things. Is this guidance from SAPOL, or is this some internal Neighbourhood Watch rule?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that all Neighbourhood Watch groups have an area coordinator, but the detail you are requesting I am very happy to take on notice and get that detail for you.

Mr ODENWALDER: It would be helpful to know where the direction comes from initially. It seems that Mr Tavender is quoting something quite specific in his letter. He seems quite certain of his position about what Neighbourhood Watch groups should or should not be doing. If you could clarify where that comes from, if that is a direction from SAPOL or somewhere else, it would be helpful.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, as I pointed out, they have a coordinator from SAPOL, but the—

Mr ODENWALDER: I know they do.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: —detail of any overarching—

Mr ODENWALDER: You will take that away and you will come back to the committee with a response?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am happy to do so.

Mr ODENWALDER: I will go to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 191. The last activity indicator is about online reports to Crime Stoppers. Can you clarify and quantify the in-kind support provided by SAPOL to Crime Stoppers, or indeed any other support?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell you is that the board of Crime Stoppers SA includes an assistant commissioner representative and a superintendant, officer in charge, State Intelligence Branch. SAPOL maintains the Crime Stoppers section as part of the State Intelligence Branch. The Crime Stoppers section is staffed by one senior sergeant, a coordinator; one sergeant; and one brevet sergeant intelligence officer.

Administrative support is provided by the State Intelligence Branch. SAPOL also provides call centre staffing, as they answer the 1800 333 000 telephone calls, triage and provide the information for immediate actioning or to the Crime Stoppers section for value-adding in non-urgent matters. Police operational staff then action the incoming information through normal investigative processes, reporting outcomes back to the Crime Stoppers section.

Mr ODENWALDER: Can you separate the number of calls to 131 444 from the number of calls to Crime Stoppers? How does it work practically in the call centre, and is it possible to break the two streams of calls down?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I can break them down, yes. What breakdown would you like?

Mr ODENWALDER: The breakdown of calls. There is an estimated result of 21,077 for the whole number of contacts—no, that is including online reports. We will stick with the phones for now, so if you could break those down for me that would be great.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, can you elaborate on what breakdown you would like?

Mr ODENWALDER: The separation of calls to the Crime Stoppers number and the calls to the 131 444 number. Do they go to the same place?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, they do. For 2018-19?

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Calls received on 131 444 is 547,852, and calls received to Crime Stoppers is 22,317.

Mr ODENWALDER: Do you have the 000 calls there for the same period by any chance?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, 166,772.

Mr ODENWALDER: And these are 000 calls directed to SAPOL?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Do you have the 2017-18 figures there?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, 131 444 is 485,643, 000 calls is 154,655 and Crime Stoppers is 20,355.

Mr ODENWALDER: So quite a significant increase in the 131 444 calls.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes—across the board, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: At some level within SAPOL there must be a justification for the ongoing in-kind support for Crime Stoppers. How does SAPOL measure the success of Crime Stoppers in order to justify providing that in-kind support? Are there any measures of success or any indicators, or is it simply reporting from the board?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am told by the commissioner that SAPOL see Crime Stoppers as a useful tool and that it is one they are willing to continue to support.

Mr ODENWALDER: But are there any indicators? Is there any measure of success? Could we envision a time when at some point they do not believe that because of some sort of measure, or is it just a principle?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am told there is a record of calls received, apprehensions, property recovered and drug apprehensions as well. Those details are kept on record, so that would be the measure.

Mr ODENWALDER: Are you happy to provide those statistics to the committee for this year and for the previous year?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: This year and the previous year, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: That would be great, thank you. Have you or anyone from your office met with the CE of Crime Stoppers or anyone from the board since the budget?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am 99 per cent sure that my staff have had dealings with them, but for clarification of dates and times and when we spoke to whoever, I am happy to take that on notice and get you that detail.

Mr ODENWALDER: Was the future monetary funding of Crime Stoppers discussed?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: With Crime Stoppers?

Mr ODENWALDER: With Crime Stoppers, yes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The future commitments, as I have outlined, are ongoing.

Mr ODENWALDER: No, not in-kind, money.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As if they would like any more support?

Mr ODENWALDER: With financial funding.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: We have had discussions with Crime Stoppers. I know they have some great sponsorship and we have talked to them about opportunities to enhance that.

Mr ODENWALDER: What was the nature of that conversation about ways to enhance corporate sponsorship?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not have the details of those conversations.

Mr ODENWALDER: Could you get that and provide it?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: If there is anything that I can pass on to you, I certainly will.

Mr ODENWALDER: Excellent, thank you. I will go briefly to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 182, which is in administered items, the Victims of Crime Levy. How much is currently held in the Victims of Crime Fund?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Just to be clear, we do not hold that.

Mr ODENWALDER: It is in the Attorney-General's?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: What does it mean by SAPOL administering it then?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: To be clear, this is where the Victims of Crime Levy is added to an expiation and then it is passed on.

Mr ODENWALDER: So you administer it in that sense. Alright, fair enough; that is fine—live and learn. I will go to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 189, which is about illegal drugs. Minister, how many cannabis expiations were issued in 2018-19 and how does it compare with previous years? Can you give an indication of a long-term trend in cannabis expiation notices?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not have those figures at my disposal, so I am happy to take that question on notice.

Mr ODENWALDER: Okay, thank you. Obviously, drugs take up a fair amount of police resourcing. Can you possibly quantify that in terms of police operational hours? Is any work being done in terms of quantifying how much time operational police officers and prosecutors spend on drug related activity directly?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell you is that, aligned to this work, in 2018-19 there was a little over $285 million in salary and operating costs on that subprogram you asked about.

Mr ODENWALDER: I appreciate that you may not have this figure at your fingertips, but I am asking for a rough figure as to how much policing time, including general patrol time and prosecution time, is devoted to enforcing drug laws.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The equivalent would be 1,853 full-time sworn and unsworn staff policing hours.

Mr ODENWALDER: Is this increasing? Has this increased in previous years, both in total and as a proportion of total police hours?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Over the past two years, it has been nominally the same.

Mr ODENWALDER: Are we winning the war on drugs, as the government promised to do upon election?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What budget line are you referring to?

Mr ODENWALDER: Illegal drugs, page 189. The government went to the election promising to win the war on drugs. Are we winning that war?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I appreciate that this does not have a direct line in the budget but I am happy to answer your question. It probably stems back to one we had earlier in road safety. It is a bigger picture operation. Just as road safety covers a whole gamut, the war on drugs covers a whole gamut. From a policing perspective, yes, I think we are doing a very good job in that area.

Mr ODENWALDER: Can we expect over the life of this government to see a decrease in policing hours that need to be directed to drug law enforcement?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I think that would not be the correct way to look at it because a fluctuation in the figures we have just discussed could well mean improved policing. It could mean that police are doing a better job. It is about the outcomes, and we will keep working towards that.

Mr ODENWALDER: How would we measure the victory in the war on drugs? How do we know by the next election that you have won this war?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: You are asking—

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, I am asking you. Your government promised to win the war on drugs, or to at least prosecute a war on drugs. How is it going?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: We are doing that. We have made that really clear. We can also talk about the things we are doing in Corrections during the next portfolio area. I know there have been a number of operations—and I will just get some detail from the commissioner about the work SAPOL does with the federal police.

There is the joint agency ice task force, which I know has had a lot of success, and there are a number of outstanding task forces with the AFP. That work is ongoing. I know that there have been a number of successful operations, and SAPOL do a lot of work in that area.

Mr ODENWALDER: Do SAPOL keep estimates—I know they cannot be exact—of the amount of ice, for instance, that is on the streets at any given time?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is not in the remit, if you like, of SAPOL, but they work with other agencies to determine that. There are a number of measures that they use. It is a bit of a catch 22. If you look at the recent wastewater results, Murray Bridge actually came down in its numbers, from my recollection. Not coincidentally, there was a very big operation up there where SAPOL and the forces involved did a really great job in identifying and securing some of these illegal drugs and making a raid. They had great success there.

I think that what you are saying is a little bit counterintuitive, in that, if they make a raid, how does that impact on the community? If people keep doing these illegal activities, SAPOL need to make sure that they are there and working with the joint agency task force to do their work. So the measure that you ask for is not a specific one that SAPOL keep, but they work with other agencies to keep track of that. Murray Bridge is a good example of the success that they have had.

Mr ODENWALDER: Presumably, there is a lot of cross-border cooperation around the Riverland and Mildura area.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Has the commissioner come to you with any further legislative change around drug law enforcement?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: Have you sought any advice from the commissioner at any stage about the provisions of the Road Traffic Act that prevent police from acting on a positive roadside drug test as a reasonable cause to search persons or vehicles for drugs?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The commissioner and I have spoken about it, but he has not come to me urging me to make changes along those lines.

Mr ODENWALDER: I might just quickly go to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 183, which is about identifying other opportunities for legislative reform as part of SAPOL's reason for existence. My first question is, broadly: are there any future areas of legislative change you have planned in order to make policing more effective and reduce crime?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: This will be fundamentally worked around the Duggan review, which we are expecting later this year.

Mr ODENWALDER: When is the Duggan review due to report?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Later this year.

Mr ODENWALDER: Do you know when?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not have the date in front of me.

Mr ODENWALDER: Are there terms of reference in existence for this review?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, there are terms of reference.

Mr ODENWALDER: Have they been made public?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not know. I will take that on notice.

Mr ODENWALDER: Can you provide it to the committee, please?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will take that on notice as well, yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Are you the minister responsible for the Police Complaints and Discipline Act?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am sorry, what budget line and page are you referring to?

Mr ODENWALDER: You are on page 183 still, 'identifying opportunities for legislative reform'.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, but how does that tie in to your question?

Mr ODENWALDER: It is about legislative reform.

The CHAIR: It is dot point 4, I think, minister.

Mr ODENWALDER: It is about legislative reform. I am just asking a simple question, and if the answer is no, perhaps I will move on. Are you the minister responsible for the Police Complaints and Discipline Act?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, not to my knowledge; I think it is the Attorney-General.

Mr ODENWALDER: Do you agree with the police commissioner's public statements that the definition of corruption in that act is too broad, and have you discussed it with the commissioner?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, we have not discussed the commissioner's definition.

Mr ODENWALDER: Do you agree that it is too broad, or have you never given it any thought?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I would have to read the commissioner's words and take them into account.

Mr ODENWALDER: Do you agree with the ICAC commissioner that the police commissioner should no longer be able to dismiss complaints against police officers?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is a matter for the Attorney-General.

Mr ODENWALDER: I was just asking whether you agree with your own police commissioner.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is a matter for the Attorney-General.

The CHAIR: Order! There is a point of order, member for Morphett.

Mr PATTERSON: I do not think the line of questioning—

Mr Odenwalder interjecting:

The CHAIR: Wait, member for Elizabeth. I will hear it.

Mr PATTERSON: As stated by the minister, I do not think it is relevant to these budget papers, unless he can point out another line.

Mr Odenwalder interjecting:

The CHAIR: No, member for Elizabeth, I will make a ruling on this. I have been giving this some thought and paying attention to the line of questioning. The responsibility is with the Attorney-General. All the member for Elizabeth is doing is asking the Minister for Police for his opinion. He may or may not have an opinion on it and he may or may not decide to answer it; it is entirely up to him, but I am happy to take the question.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Thank you, Chair. I take your point that we are not here for opinions: we are here to discuss the budget.

Mr ODENWALDER: No, these are proposed legislative changes, proposed by the ICAC commissioner that your own commissioner has views on, and I am wondering whether you have a view on it. That is all.

The CHAIR: If I could just add one more thing as Chair, we have identified that on page 183, dot point 4, key agency outputs does talk about opportunities for legislative reform, so it is within the framework of that.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Thank you, Chair. As I pointed out, this is a matter for the Attorney-General.

Mr ODENWALDER: If only committee B were as wisely presided over. I refer to Budget Measures Statement, part 2, page 76, increases in expiation fees.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, budget paper—

Mr ODENWALDER: Budget Measures Statement, part 2, page 76. There is a table which lists the increases in expiation fees. What is the total revenue expected to be gained from the increase in the corporate fee speeding fine? It has increased by 500 per cent. Is there a targeted revenue expected?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, I think the police commissioner has made this very clear. We did start the day talking about road safety. One of the impacts we have is being able to make sure that we do target people, through fines, for doing the wrong thing. The figure that you are after—

Mr ODENWALDER: The corporate fee does not target people for doing the wrong thing; it targets corporations.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: People who are avoiding responsibility. You do not pay the fee if you declare who is behind the wheel. There are a number of assumptions that are taken into place, and the member for Light would appreciate that these are calculated on a whole lot of expectations, etc. The figure that is estimated is $8.3 million.

Mr ODENWALDER: Was there any external consultation before the decision to increase the corporate fee? I am thinking of the RAA, with industry groups, with transport companies.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: We did have—and I think I mentioned this before in the previous estimates—our road safety summit, where a number of these issues were discussed. When we were having a look at things that could impact road safety, these proposals were put forward. Making sure that we do all we can to keep our roads safe is a key element of what we are doing here. You will see that in the fact that the fees and fines that have gone up are for the top-end people who are clearly flouting the laws by going 30-plus kilometres over the speed limit.

I think the commissioner is also on the record talking about distraction and mobile phones and the impact that has on road safety. In fact, distraction is one of the key issues we are driving through our road safety campaign. There was discussion, I know, at the summit, or the forum, however you like to describe it, as part of this, but this has also been focused around road safety outcomes. I know the commissioner has spoken about it on a number of occasions.

I have just been informed that there was a comparison done with other jurisdictions as well. I note that, after our decisions here, Queensland are now talking about having a $1,000 fine, I think, for mobile phones and distraction in vehicles. There was that comparison done with other jurisdictions, yes, to add to the answer.

Mr ODENWALDER: Is the government actively considering any further increase to the fine for using a mobile phone while driving, as you just brought up?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The government does not have that position, but the commissioner will be having a look at the modified behaviour. I think we spoke about that in road safety, that one of the key focuses that we want to look at here is changing people's behaviour and making sure there is a focus on getting people to do that. The commissioner will be monitoring that and, no doubt, will report back to me on any findings that he makes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Do you stand by your statement that you made on ABC 891 on Monday 1 July that you have never used a mobile phone while driving?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: You stand by the statement?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

The CHAIR: Member for Elizabeth, I am going to throw to the government side. The member for Finniss has indicated he has a question.

Mr BASHAM: Thank you, Chair. How will the government funding of the DPM stage 2 increase SAPOL's capacity to protect and serve?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is a very good question, and it is good that we have—

The CHAIR: Member for Finniss, you have done very well. Could you give me a budget line please? While he is looking for the budget line, I remind the opposition that sometime today they will need to read in the omnibus questions. The minister is here for the entire day, so it is up to you when you do that, but you will need to read them in at some point.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Are you referring to Budget Measures Statement, Volume 5, page 73?

Mr BASHAM: Yes, I am.

The CHAIR: Is it district policing? We are looking at—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Budget Measures Statement, Volume 5, page 73, he said. Thank you, this is really important and I am very proud that our government put more than $52 million into building South Australia's security. I might say that after 16 years of Labor we were left a little bit vulnerable in this space, so we are very happy to be injecting this money into the safety and security of South Australians to make our community a much safer place.

An integral part of South Australia's security is the District Policing Model (DPM). The South Australia Police key strategy is to be accessible, innovative and efficient in the use of our resources and responsive in the delivery of our front-line services, regardless of the circumstances. In support of that strategy, in recent times SAPOL has implemented a District Policing Model for metropolitan Adelaide, which we would all be aware of, designed to position the organisation to meet the challenges presented by the constantly changing environment and growing demand for policing services.

This is the biggest change to SAPOL strategy and structure since the introduction of the intelligence-led policing model in 1998. Involving almost 2,000 staff, the DPM creates larger and more flexible work groups supported by centralised functions that enable SAPOL to manage demand for police services while better focusing efforts on protecting the community and reducing crime.

Since 5 July 2018, six local service areas were merged to form four districts, each with geographical areas generating a similar level of demand and staffing levels—something the commissioner has been very focused on. This was stage 1 of the implementation of the new model. Patrols are now dispatched based on proximity to the event and capability instead of geographical responsibility. This has been achieved through the use of automatic vehicle location and intelligent dispatch.

Within the communications group, centralised aspects of the DPM were implemented in 2017-18 together with the establishment of a state response manager within the communications centre on a 24/7 basis. Unfortunately, due to efficiency measures implemented by the previous government, stage 2 of the DPM implementation was delayed. This much-needed funding has been addressed by the Marshall government in this year's budget.

Stage 2 will allow SAPOL to position its resources to maximum effect, with district policing teams to prevent harm earlier and with response teams providing a dedicated ability to attend to priority calls for assistance. Stage 2 will significantly increase police availability during times of peak demand. It will allow a new policing strategy aimed at solving issues that create repeat demand for police services.

This involves replacing the current patrol structure with a two-tiered approach comprising response and district policing teams. Again, this is a direction the commissioner has been very keen on, and we are happy to support this implementation.

There will be 60 response teams (565 FTEs) dedicated to attending urgent matters, and DPTs will be intelligence led. They will target specific addresses to problem solve the causes of demand for police services and to better protect high risk and repeat victims. There will be 48 DPTs (448 FTEs), with 12 per district, that will also provide surge capacity to support response teams during times of high demand. The combination of response and DPTs will build a highly visible, accessible and consistent police presence across the Adelaide metropolitan area.

An integral part of the DPM will be the telephone resolution desk within the communications centre. A trial will be undertaken of this initiative where police officers will be tasked with speaking with complainants re non-urgent matters with a goal of resolving the issue over the phone and reducing the need for police attendance. The DPM model is a model that the commissioner has been championing for a long time. It was meant to be rolled out in two phases.

Phase 1 is already up and operational, and the commissioner is very keen to be rolling out phase 2. We are happy to support it and have delivered the funding to allow that to happen. We look forward to seeing the result in our community of having this two-pronged attack, if you like, to make sure that we are delivering the best service for South Australians out in the community and that we can do all we can to keep them as safe as possible.

The CHAIR: I have a slight correction to what I said earlier. The omnibus questions from the opposition will need to be read in either this session or the next. My understanding is that the final session will be Rec and Sport, which will be a different budget line. It is entirely up to you when you do that. The member for Elizabeth has the call.

Mr ODENWALDER: I will get on with the district policing model, on the same budget line as the previous question. Have any positions been lost, or will any positions be lost, in community programs units across the state as a result of the implementation of the DPM?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What community programs units are you referring to?

Mr ODENWALDER: I am referring to the community programs units that are attached to each station and that reach out to the community in terms of education and those types of things. Will there be, or has there been, any reduction of staff in those units?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that crime prevention will continue as is, but some of those resources will come across to the district policing teams, and they will take a greater responsibility in the community policing area.

Mr ODENWALDER: So the community programs units as they exist at the moment will shrink and people will go to other parts of the organisation.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: They will potentially change. As I mentioned, the DPTs will take on a greater responsibility in that area.

Mr ODENWALDER: So the level of community engagement or services provided by the community programs unit will stay the same but will just be dissipated across the organisation; is that what you are saying? Is that the intention?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The level of community engagement on crime prevention will actually be enhanced under this new model.

Mr ODENWALDER: Okay.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: You do not look convinced. You raised your eyes.

Mr ODENWALDER: You are very convincing. Will there be a reduction in police presence in Aldinga, Sellicks Beach and McLaren Vale?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: No? At the end of the implementation of this model, will they have the same level of policing on the ground, 24 hours a day, that they do now?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The same level of policing service will continue.

Mr ODENWALDER: So there will be the same number of police officers in those areas in that region as there are now, after the implementation of this model?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: All those areas you mentioned are part of the southern district, and that will continue.

Mr ODENWALDER: Good. Good work. Time has got away from us, but I want to quickly ask a question. I refer to Budget Measures Statement, Part 2, page 74, regarding the rapid response capability. Minister, is there any research to suggest that people feel safer when there are heavily armed police patrolling sporting and cultural events?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell you is that other states have implemented this, and South Australia, the Northern Territory and Tasmania are the only states that have not implemented a rapid response capability. I am led to believe that Tasmania are in the throes of exploring it as well. We do live in a time of risk. That is a fact and a reality, so we want to make sure that we have the right set-up to keep South Australians safe. This rapid response capability model also complements the National Counter-Terrorism Plan.

At the last budget, we made 48 FTEs available by putting in civilians to do the office work in police stations and putting police back out on the street. We think it is really important to have them on the street in that capacity. This is also designed to complement the government's Counter-Terrorism Action Plan.

This is a really big win for South Australia. It will give that middle tier of protection. We have talked before about having police on the beat and then having the STAR Group at the top level, having that capability in the middle, as have other jurisdictions. As it stands, the Northern Territory will be the only ones not looking at this. We think this is a capability and a group that will give extra protection and extra surety to the South Australian community, to know that they are being protected.

Unfortunately, we now live in a world where a number of things happen. We see them on TV. The most recent one was what we saw in New Zealand. We know that these things happen. Christchurch, our sister city, was the venue for some very bad deeds. We want to make sure that we have that capability best prepared as possible. Once people are trained up through the rapid response capability, we will have bomb appraisal officers, tactical flight officers and also—I like this term; it is the best one—remote piloted air system operators, who will be operating drones.

It is this new technology and this new capability that we need in the world we live in. We would be naive to think that we should not be prepared here in South Australia. There is no reason to be alarmed—I must stress that point. There has been no increase to any threat levels or anything like that, but we do know that we need to make sure that we are ready. A key objective of this is to reduce the risk of injury to the community, police and offenders through the use of the tactical options not available to front-line officers. That is the capability that is going to be in that rapid response unit.

This is a really good outcome for South Australia. It is something I know the police commissioner has been focused on. Interestingly enough, when I go out to talk to people—and I am not sure whether the police commissioner has experienced this, but if I have experienced it I am sure he has as well—people bail me up saying, 'What do I need to do to get involved in this operation and be part of this?'

In fact, I was at the retirement dinner the other night and a number of retiring police officers said, 'I can't believe you are bringing this in now and not five or ten years ago. We would love to have been part of this. This is a really exciting operation.' I think this is a really good thing for our state that will add to the investment that we made of $52 million to increase the security and safety of South Australians. We want to build on that. We know it is important and we are very happy to be delivering on all those metrics.

Mr ODENWALDER: The question was about the research. Will you undertake to supply the committee with any research that suggests people are safer and/or feel safer under these conditions?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: And my answer was that it is being done in other jurisdictions; work has been done there, and we will be following suit.

Mr ODENWALDER: So you will share that with the committee? You will undertake to share that with the committee?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I just said that we are following what the other jurisdictions are doing. It has been very much identified that this is something that is needed. The only jurisdiction that does not have it is the Northern Territory. We will be following suit.

The CHAIR: Thank you to the committee. Time has expired. There being no further questions, I declare the examination of the proposed payments for the portfolio of the South Australia Police to be completed. The committee will now suspend until 1.45pm.

Sitting suspended from 12:48 to 13:45.