Department for Correctional Services, $341,862,000

Membership:

Ms Wortley substituted for Mr Gee.

Minister:

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

Departmental Advisers:

Mr D. Brown, Chief Executive, Department for Correctional Services.

Mr C. Sexton, Executive Director, People and Business Services, Department for Correctional Services.

Ms V. Du, Senior Executive Services Consultant, Department for Correctional Services.

Ms S. Borrillo, Executive Services Officer, Department for Correctional Services.

The CHAIR: Welcome to the afternoon session of estimates A. The portfolio we are dealing with this afternoon, in the first instance at least, is Correctional Services. The minister appearing is the Minister for Police, Emergency Services and Correctional Services. I declare the proposed payments open for examination and invite the minister to introduce his advisers and make a short statement if he wishes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will not make a statement, but I will introduce the people who are here with me. On my left, your right, is Mr Chris Sexton, the Executive Director of People and Business Services for DCS. On my right is David Brown, the Chief Executive of the Department for Correctional Services. Behind me on my left is Sofia Borrillo, the Executive Services Officer, and on my right is Vivian Du, Senior Executive Services Consultant.

The CHAIR: This might be slightly unusual, but I am going to give the member for Florey the first call because I believe she has to be elsewhere soon.

Ms BEDFORD: I refer the minister to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 101, under program 2. Are there any plans to improve the use of, for the public, the very restricted and limited visits booking service, particularly in terms of when calls can be made to book visits for both men's and women's prisons?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do apologise, I did not hear that question very well.

Ms BEDFORD: It is a very difficult service to access an appointment time to visit either the men's or Women's Prison, so are there any plans to improve the use of it for the public? For instance, I tried to access a visit to Mobilong last week and was on the line for more than half an hour before I could get through.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I can inform the committee that there is work being done on the kiosk system through Unilink, and future stages are to deliver online bookings for both professional and domestic bookings to very much improve that system. The movement is there towards an online system to make that more efficient, yes.

Ms BEDFORD: Terrific. What improvements are planned for the professional booking service for the Women's Prison, which I understand currently has to be done through the Yatala Labour Prison? That may be part of your previous answer, but that often means that the women who are trying to be visited are off site or doing other things. Is this new service you are talking about going to solve that problem?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am told the phone professional booking service does cover both sites but, yes, this new online service will be a far better service than that.

Ms BEDFORD: How far away do we think that is?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will have to take that on notice to get a date for you.

Ms BEDFORD: Can something be done to ensure requests for professional visits are better managed by making better use of the room reserved for the prison social worker, which I understand is not always fully utilised? So, if there is a backup of professional visits, that one room remains empty when it may not be required.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: At the operational level, I do not have that level of detail, but what I can tell you is that in last year's budget we did contribute significant money as part of our Better Prisons program to build a new visit centre, and that will be very much focused around making visits more efficient, more effective and better for everyone.

Ms BEDFORD: On that, the Women's Prison is obviously going to be finished far more quickly than the Yatala proposed changes. What delay do you now think is likely before the commencement of the redevelopment of Yatala?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell you about the status of the project is that the design has been developed, and that has been done over a number of months and is almost complete. The rest of the process has been suspended.

Ms BEDFORD: For an indeterminate period?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, it has been suspended.

Ms BEDFORD: My last question relates to visiting again. Can appointments be made consecutively for professional visitors? By that, I mean that if a single professional visitor wants to see more than one inmate or person in custodial sentence, can they have consecutive appointments, rather than having to go in and out and in and out, which I understand is the case now? You cannot book consecutive appointments if you are visiting more than one person on a professional visit.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that visit arrangements do differ slightly from site to site, but I am happy to take that on notice and get more detail for you.

Ms BEDFORD: Fabulous. I will be writing to you with a bit more detail. Thank you, minister.

The CHAIR: Thank you, member for Florey. The member for Elizabeth has the call.

Mr ODENWALDER: I draw your attention to Budget Measures Statement, part 2, page 20, which talks about the Adelaide Women's Prison expansion. I have just a few questions about that. What stage are we at with that? Has it been to Public Works yet? Excuse my ignorance, but has it been to the Public Works Committee, or is it not at that stage yet?

The CHAIR: For my benefit, member for Elizabeth, there were two questions there: has it been to Public Works and where are you at with it? Is that essentially—

Mr ODENWALDER: Where are you at with it? No, first of all: has it been to Public Works? My second question would be: what is the need for the expansion? Can you let us know what the need for the expansion of the Women's Prison is? How can you project that need?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As I am informed, as far as the process goes, to answer that question as fulsomely as I possibly can, this was all part of our Better Prisons program announced in last year's budget. There are two sections to this: one is the 40 new beds, and I am informed that that has gone through Public Works and is progressing, and the other is the new reception or gatehouse and the visit centre, which we just discussed with the member for Florey, and that has not gone to Public Works yet.

Mr ODENWALDER: When will that be going to Public Works? Is it scheduled?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It has not been scheduled at this stage, I am informed.

Mr ODENWALDER: This is slightly related to what the member for Florey was asking: will it be delayed by the delay in the Yatala redevelopment process? Will that hold up the Women's Prison?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, I do not believe that it will.

Mr ODENWALDER: How many people are currently housed at the Adelaide Women's Prison? What is the current population? I guess there are two questions: what is the capacity and what is the population?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that the capacity today is 176 beds and the prison count today, the personnel count there, is 154.

Mr ODENWALDER: Is that population number growing over time? Is the trend upwards?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The figures I have in front of me show that on 1 July 2018 there were 224 female prisoners. This number decreased to 199 on 12 June 2019—a decrease of 25 female prisoners across the same date.

Mr ODENWALDER: A reduction?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: What do you put that down to? Are there more women entering the community corrections side of things? Is that what is happening, or is there a decrease in women serving custodial sentences?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: A bit like what we talked about earlier in relation to road safety, when we talked about the number of deaths on the road year on year, the direct correlation one year to another is probably not, I am informed, the best correlation to make. For example, you would want to get it over a five-year spread. A trend more that way would give you a more realistic figure, so that is something.

At the same time, I think that it points to the fact that the bipartisan 10by20 program that we are aligned to has had some good effects. I know the home detention program has had some really good outcomes as well. I think I have spoken in these estimates committees, and probably with you even offline, that part of the 10by20 picture is about stopping that cycle of recidivism. It is about stopping people coming into prison, serving their sentence, getting out of prison and then getting into the bad circle and coming back in again. I take the opportunity to commend all the Corrections staff, who do wonderful work in this area.

Where we can find ways to break that cycle—I have been to the Women's Prison and met with and seen a lot of people who have gone through the home detention program by OARS. That has had great success, as has the Work Ready, Release Ready program, where work is done with a number of these people to upskill them and get them ready for work so that, when they do leave, they can find a job, they can work, they keep busy, they earn an income and they find housing. Some of the success stories have been fantastic, so it is all a part of that.

As with the road toll, if it turned around tomorrow, you would not say, 'Oh, we found the silver bullet.' I do not think we could ever say that. You would have to look over a longer period to get this figure.

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, that is why I asked about the trend. I understand what you are saying about year-on-year figures; that is perfectly reasonable.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I only had those year-on-year figures, but the program—

Mr ODENWALDER: Could you provide to the committee the trend figures, perhaps, for the last five years, in terms of women incarcerated?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, I am happy to. To that point, I have some of the figures I can avail you of. There has been a significant and sustained growth in prison numbers, resulting in a 33 per cent increases in the South Australian prison population when comparing 2019 with 2009. There has been an increase over that 10-year period; however, in the past 12 months, the rate of increase over the previous five years has slowed to 21 per cent—

Mr ODENWALDER: Are you talking about male and female numbers?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: —yes, this is not gender-based—on 12 June 2019, from 31 per cent on 30 June 2014. I will just say that last one again. In the past 12 months, the rate of increase over the previous five years slowed to 21 per cent on 12 June 2019 from 31 per cent on 30 June 2014. So, over the last five years, the figure shows that it is slowing. Over the last 10 years, it increased by 33 per cent. That is an indication that this work is progressing well.

Mr ODENWALDER: What about women? Do you have individual figures? If you could figure out the same trend figures you just gave me but specifically for women, that would be good.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: We will have a look. I understand the point. That was the whole of system. If we can break that down and get those figures for you if they are available, I will happily provide them.

Mr ODENWALDER: What I am getting to is the need for the 40-bed expansion in any case. The new gatehouse is a separate matter, but I wonder if you could explain the need for the 40 beds. Is there a projected increase of that number?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: There are a couple of things I will say to that. The short answer is that I will take it on notice and get the exact figures, but I am informed that over 10 years there is projected growth. That is the projection from all the best available information and knowledge, so we have to go by that prediction and projection. The other part is improving the prison environment. When we want to work on this 10by20 that we have as a bipartisan agreement, it is really important that we have an environment that can get the best outcomes as well.

I am not sure how recently you have been to the Women's Prison, but you can see that some of these upgrades and spaces create a far more positive environment to get better outcomes for the people in these facilities. It is a measured part, and that is where Better Prisons fits in and brings a lot to bear when it comes to helping deliver the 10by20 target we have agreed to.

Having these better facilities makes it a more positive environment for people to be in. It helps them to engage in the programs that we want to get them in so that they will do that work, engage in those programs, get themselves in a better space—and we keep talking about the cycle—so that when they go out they will be in a better space and a better place. They will hopefully get into work, get back into the community and then give back to the community, get a job and pay taxes. They will start contributing to the community, as opposed to costing, obviously, when they are in the system.

Mr ODENWALDER: Does that work include giving mothers better access to their children and babies? Can you expand on whether there is much more work to be done in that area before the next election, say, over the forward estimates? Will that involve any more capital works?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As part of the upgrades, part of this Better Prisons program, we are upgrading the health and wellbeing centre there. I have been out and seen this firsthand. It is looking fantastic; that was a little while ago. The health and wellbeing upgrade will allow mothers and babies to be in this place and in this space, which is a really big step forward. That is fantastic.

We have a multiagency working group that is looking at expanding that and how we can do that, so it has been a focus. I have a bit more information here. I can tell you that a new health and wellbeing facility and offender development building is under development at the AWP and they are due to be commissioned in mid 2019.

The health and wellbeing facility at the AWP will be able to accommodate both remand and sentenced high and low-security women who give birth in custody, and it will have capacity to accommodate a woman who is in custody after a recent birth—that is, the last few days or weeks—and the baby is in her care. This short stay, live-in section will accommodate the very small number of women who give birth in custody each year and who are eligible to maintain the care of their newborn infant.

Over this short-stay period mother-infant bonding attachment would be a primary focus, and the facility provides greater opportunity for breastfeeding. The mother and infant section of the facility will incorporate two times two bedrooms with bathrooms, which will enable accommodation of two women at a time, either two birthing mothers or a birthing mother and a suitable support prisoner.

Mr ODENWALDER: Still on the Women's Prison, I understand that in Victoria there is a trial that has either commenced or is about to commence, but there is a trial in any case to reduce dramatically the amount of strip searching that goes on particularly in women's prisons on the basis, the proponents of this say, that it is an archaic practice and that female prisoners are far more likely than women in the general population to experience sexual violence, and so strip searching exacerbates the problems. Is any work being done in South Australia on such a trial, or can you expand on any work that might be being done in that area?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell you is that the department is watching that work in Victoria you talk about very closely and keeping a very close eye on what the outcomes are. Again, as part of our Better Prisons program and the building of the new admissions area, I can let you know that space has been left to accommodate the same or similar equipment should it be determined that that is a path we would like to go down.

In short, yes, we are watching that and looking at the outcomes and how that transpires in Victoria. Again, as part of our Better Prisons program, it is all well and good to have the equipment you are talking about, but you have to have the right space and place to apply it and use it, and we have done that with our investment in the new administration area. Again, the holistic, bigger picture looks at getting a Better Prisons program.

Mr ODENWALDER: I will go to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 97, which is about the Mount Gambier Prison expansion. There have been some media reports and a lot of talk, obviously, in the area. I think that your chief executive would be pretty aware of this. Along with the expansion of the Mount Gambier Prison have come some perceived social issues around the release of prisoners who are not from Mount Gambier into the community in Mount Gambier, and also the movement of prisoners' families from outside Mount Gambier into Mount Gambier and the pressure that is putting on services, including the police in Mount Gambier.

I do not know whether this is borne out by the evidence or not. I wonder whether you have done any work in that area and whether or not this is true?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Can I say, firstly, that, with respect to the reference you make, prisoners are not released into the community. Once they have served their sentence they are not prisoners anymore. I need to make that point clear, as you would understand. I will ask the chief executive to speak about that.

Mr ODENWALDER: Actually, that is worth clarifying. I am not talking about people who are released on licence: these are people who are free to go wherever they like.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: And that is the point: they are not prisoners anymore. Thank you for clarifying that, because you are right and I take that on board. They are not prisoners; they are free to go wherever they like. From an operational perspective, I will ask the chief executive to speak to that.

Mr BROWN: Firstly, I would point out that the vast majority of prisoners who are discharged from Mount Gambier Prison return to the place of residence where they resided before they were arrested and convicted by the court. The department has specific programs and services in place to support that process, as does Mount Gambier as the managing contractor for the prison.

As part of the most recent contract that G4S entered into for the management and operation of Mount Gambier, they entered into a reintegration partnership with SYC. Certainly in the briefings I have received from the partners on their program, most of their services are delivered in Adelaide because that is where the offenders are returning upon release. I might add that that service is available to people who are discharged without any supervision conditions, as well as to those who are subject to supervision conditions.

In relation to families moving to communities to be closer to their loved ones who are serving in a regional prison, we have done no specific study to look at whether that is in fact a trend. What I would say is that prisoners in the South Australian correctional system move between prisons quite regularly. A prisoner who is accommodated in Mount Gambier for various reasons might find themselves relocated to Adelaide or to Port Augusta or to the prison in Port Lincoln. It is often difficult for a family to say with certainty that their loved one is going to serve the entire sentence in one location.

Mr ODENWALDER: Thank you for that; that was a very useful answer. In relation to Mount Gambier particularly, there are some calls to do further study. I do not know whether they have come across your desk yet, minister, but will you consider further study, given the quite recent expansion, or is that something you expect the private provider to do?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is probably outside the scope of what DCS would normally do. Their job is to run the prisons, obviously, and, in Mount Gambier's case, G4S run that prison under the contract signed under the previous government, as well as that expansion work down there. It is potentially a question for Human Services and something they may wish to look at if it is raised as an issue. Can I add that it is not something SAPOL have raised with me is an issue, so it may be better to direct the question to the Department of Human Services if they have any research or indications of what you are alluding to.

Mr ODENWALDER: I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 101, custodial services, under the targets, the Yatala prison redevelopment. Minister, when will the Yatala prison redevelopment project be complete?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: At present, it is due for completion in the first quarter of 2021. As you know, there is a suspension to the procurement process but the design is still progressing. If there is anything further that I can inform you of I will, but that is where it sits.

Mr ODENWALDER: It is still on track to be finished in the first quarter of 2021; is that what you are saying?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No. Just to clarify, it was on track to be completed by the first quarter of 2021 but, whilst the design is being developed and is progressing, there is a suspension to the procurement process, as you are aware. My apologies; just to clarify, it is the first quarter of the 2021-22 financial year, not the calendar year. That is my fault, sorry.

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes, I am with you. Will the proposal be resubmitted to the Public Works Committee for re-examination?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As I said earlier, we are still working on the designs; they are still being developed. I would have to take on notice whether or not that would have to happen.

Mr ODENWALDER: At the time of the first Public Works Committee hearing into the Yatala redevelopment, did you have any concerns about the veracity of the tender process?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The veracity? How do you mean 'veracity'?

Mr ODENWALDER: How can I put this? Were you aware that two of your employees who were involved in the Yatala redevelopment were the subject of an ICAC investigation?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As far as the ICAC investigation is concerned I can say that, as revealed by the ICAC commissioner last week, he has been investigating allegations of corruption and two men have been arrested. As the matter is before the courts and the subject of an ICAC investigation, I cannot comment any further at this time.

What I can say is that the South Australian government believes in and fully supports a robust and just investigation into any matters where allegations such as corruption arise. The matter is in the hands of the judicial system and we await its findings.

Mr ODENWALDER: But were you aware of the investigation at the time of the first Public Works Committee hearing?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will just add to that statement and say that it was not two staff members who were arrested; it was only one staff member of DCS. My apologies.

Mr ODENWALDER: Who was the other person?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, I cannot comment on an ICAC investigation.

Mr ODENWALDER: Are there any other DCS employees you are aware of who are being investigated by anybody in relation to any DCS tender or procurement?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I cannot comment on an ICAC investigation.

Mr ODENWALDER: I am not necessarily asking you to comment on an ICAC investigation.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That's good, so I won't.

Mr ODENWALDER: I am asking you whether there are any other DCS employees who are being investigated by anybody in relation to any tender or procurement process within the department?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I refer you to my previous statement.

Mr ODENWALDER: So you are just not going to answer that? Were either of the two men we are talking about involved in the process of awarding Serco the contract to run the Adelaide Remand Centre?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I cannot comment on a matter that is before the ICAC or on people who are before the ICAC.

Mr ODENWALDER: When will the investigation into the Yatala tender and procurement process be complete? The suspension, when do you envisage that being complete? What is the process you are going through?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As I mentioned before, I cannot comment on matters that are before ICAC. As far as the project is concerned, the design is progressing but the procurement has been suspended and I am not in a place to update you any further on that process.

Mr ODENWALDER: On the suspension? And you cannot tell us when that suspension will be lifted?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I just gave my answer.

Mr ODENWALDER: Will there be any further costs to either DCS or perhaps DPTI associated with this investigation, associated with the suspension? Do you incur any ongoing costs by the fact that the project has stalled?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It is too premature to identify that at the moment.

Mr ODENWALDER: I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 101, custodial services, the same line, targets, but this time about the Better Prisons workforce flexibility project. How many people are working directly on this project?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I did a straw count in my head and with the chief executive to get you to a figure as best we can. I can give you that figure, but it may not be exact, so I do not know whether I want to give it to you now. I am happy to give you what our guesstimate is after doing that little headcount, or I could take it on advice.

Mr ODENWALDER: A rough figure will be okay.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am told that a rough count would be about eight.

Mr ODENWALDER: About eight?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Are they or were they all existing DCS staff?

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

Mr ODENWALDER: What qualifications do they have to conduct this benchmarking exercise? Have they been trained to do this kind of work?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is a very broad question. They are a highly qualified group of people, but I am happy to take that on notice and get you more information.

Mr ODENWALDER: I would appreciate that. Can you give the committee an idea of the actual work these eight people are doing? Presumably, they are mobile and travelling around to sites, talking to people and identifying opportunities for savings. What are they doing? How would you characterise the work they are doing?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell you is that the team is involved in delivering the Better Prisons program for South Australia. Some of those elements include improving competition, which is increasing the external involvement in service delivery by transferring the operations of the Adelaide Remand Centre to the external provider through a competitive procurement process, and improving accountability, which is implementing a benchmarking framework against which each public prisons budget and service performance will be measured.

What we are going to do there—and this has not been done before—is have a look at all the prisons and facilities individually and say, 'If they are doing something really good in Port Lincoln, why can't we be doing the same thing in Murray Bridge? Let's share this IP. Let's share this intel. If they are doing really good things overseas or interstate, let's look at bringing in the best practices.' We talked about some of the investment in the infrastructure we are doing in terms of the gatehouse and the visit centre, etc. By changing and improving the infrastructure, there might be better ways in which we can actually manage and run the prison.

There are some great opportunities there and some really good people within DCS. That is why we are out talking to them now—getting their feedback and getting their input about how we can have this Better Prisons system. That is another element of the work. Also, they are involved in improving workforce flexibility, which will increase the use of part-time correctional officers to improve the efficient deployment of resources to meet justifiable operational demands.

We see this as a great way to grow jobs in the regions as well, where we have prisons in Port Lincoln, Murray Bridge and Port Augusta. For example, people who have a job might want a bit of extra work, or they might actually want to phase out and maybe do an apprenticeship and diversify what they are doing. Having this flexibility in the workforce will give us a great opportunity also to employ more women, potentially, into Corrections. There are some great opportunities there. People might have a flexible family life—they might be caring for an elderly person—and we think that working that flexibility into our Better Prisons project will attract new people to the industry and give us a better dynamic there as well.

The point that has been made—and I thank the chief executive for advising me on this, and again I may have made this point at last year's estimates as well—is that when we made this announcement at last year's budget I went to the Adelaide Remand Centre and said to everyone working there, 'All your jobs are guaranteed in the public corrections system.'

A lot of the work this team has done has been about case managing people from the Remand Centre into, potentially, the Northfield precinct or, as I think some have done, into the regions. We have talked about the great opportunities at Port Augusta, Port Lincoln and the like. This group has worked on that as well as on TVSPs and the opportunities there. That has also been part of their work.

One thing we did say when we made this announcement in last year's budget was that all those people who worked in the public corrections system within the Adelaide Remand Centre would stay working in the metropolitan area, primarily the Northfield precinct, where we are growing and investing and they would be able to stay working in that system if they so chose. They could have chosen to go to the regions and, as I pointed out, some have. They were the options; we made that really clear. The team is doing a really good job at case managing all those people through that process. It is quite an extensive process, as you would imagine.

Mr ODENWALDER: The Public Service Association has publicly claimed that part of this process is secret and that you are benchmarking against, obviously, Mount Gambier and a whole host of prisons interstate and overseas. The claim is that you will not divulge which prisons they are so that the Public Service Association, as the workers' representative in DCS, cannot make an assessment about how fair the work is that they are doing and so ultimately will not be in a position to judge the end results of this process. Is there a reason why they cannot get that information?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I would like to say is that we do this benchmarking. I will give you a bit of an example so that you can get an idea of the types of things we have had a look at in doing this. As we look across our prison sector and we look at Mount Gambier Prison, for example, which is run by G4S—you would be aware of that, as would the Leader of the Opposition when he re-signed the contract for G4S to run that prison—the cost per prisoner per day there is $155. A very comparative prison would be Mobilong Prison, where the cost per prisoner per day is $236.

What we are looking at is why is there a disparity, what can we do and what is happening somewhere that could be done somewhere else. This is an example of one little case study we are doing. Again, Mount Gambier is $155, and Mobilong is $236. Across the course of a year, that is $14 million extra that we are paying—

Mr ODENWALDER: Yes. I understand that internal—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: —I am making the point—let me finish—

Mr ODENWALDER: I understand that internal benchmarking comparison process.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, this is the sort of measure that we are looking at. It is $14 million that could go back into health, education, better facilities for Corrections, putting in better programs that deliver better outcomes to help reduce recidivism. That is a significant amount of money. How is that matching up, how are we looking at that, how can we actually compare systems across prisons that marry up and ask: why is it being done more efficiently and effectively there and not here and how can we get that and implement the Better Prisons program to get those better outcomes?

Mr ODENWALDER: What about the overseas and interstate prisons you are benchmarking against? Why are the PSA claiming that they cannot get a window into that process?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The way this has worked, what I have been informed and how this has progressed along the way, is that the preliminary benchmarking at sites has engaged with the local consulting committee, where members of those sites are invited to these consulting committees. Those things are talked through, and it is elaborated out as to what the measures are and how we can look to get there. They are asked to actually have input as well.

As I said, we have a lot of people in Corrections who do a really great job, and we want to get their input because they can have a lot to say about how we can do these things better, but we are not at liberty to give those staffing and posting details to the PSA. As I said, it is shared through the local consulting committees at each of the sites as we are going through this process but, as you would understand, for safety and security reasons it is not the detail that you can just bandy around what happens at different prisons, wherever they may be.

It is sensitive information for safety and security reasons, so it cannot just be thrown around, but it is broken down, if you like. When DCS go through these consulting committees, they talk through how these things were arrived at, and they do that in that consultation phase. It is extensive and we are working through each site, and they are invited to come along. In fact, I know that the team works really hard to engage the members of the facilities and make sure they are in that conversation. They do work it really hard. It is not per se for the PSA to get that information because, again, it does have safety and security implications for the other facilities that have been used to benchmark these figures.

Mr ODENWALDER: When will this whole process be complete?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell the member is that this has been very methodical. The team—and I have outlined what they are doing and the great work they are doing—have really worked through this. This has been very specific and it has had a lot of structure behind it. We have worked through it methodically and we will identify the KPIs and the performance framework. We have started doing this at two sites, and then we are going to roll it in to two more, but it is planned that it will all be finished by the end of this financial year; that is the objective.

The CHAIR: Member for Elizabeth, I might remind you that you will have to read the omnibus questions but, before you do that, the member for Morphett has indicated that he has a question.

Mr PATTERSON: I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 101, program 2. Since the passage of the Correctional Services (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill last year, how many outlaw motorcycle gang members have been prevented from visiting prisoners?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I thank the member for the question. The Marshall government is committed to making sure that we deliver on our election commitments and improve the safety and security of our prisons. This involved making some important changes to the Correctional Services Act to legislate and ban members of outlaw motorcycle gangs from visiting prisons and visiting prisoners.

Preventing outlaw motorcycle gangs from visiting prisons has removed the opportunity for radicalisation of prisoners and reduced the links between prisoners, crime organisations and their associates in the community. That was key to this legislation. We knew that these criminal organisations were trying to infiltrate through prisons, so by changing this legislation we could help crack down on that. This is often where they look to do a lot of their 'work' ('illegal activities' is a better term) to infiltrate and get these people doing this operation for them when they come out of prison as well, so we wanted to cut that off at the pass, and this legislation has helped with that.

Prisons can become a breeding ground for members of organised crime groups, such as outlaw motorcycle gangs, providing these groups with a potential source of new recruits for drugs and other crime. That is more people excluded from entering our prison environments, potentially bringing contraband into prisons and attempting to radicalise prisoners. I am pleased to inform the committee that, as of 23 July, approximately 330 individuals are excluded from visiting a South Australian prison as a result of changes to the Correctional Services (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill—330 is the number, so that has done very well.

Importantly, as part of those legislative changes, we also introduced workplace testing for prison officers, staff and contractors. We will be testing staff for alcohol and illegal drugs when there is a serious incident, at random or when there is suspicion that they are under the influence of drugs.

Drugs are regularly found in our prisons, and people working in the prison system must be supported by high standards of occupational health and safety. If prison officers or staff are under the influence of drugs or alcohol at work, they expose their colleagues by significantly increasing an already wide range of workplace risks. Prison is an environment where prisoners need to be supported to detoxify from drug addiction and prison officers need to know they are working in a setting that is as safe as possible.

In addition to drug testing staff and banning outlaw motorcycle gang members from entering a prison, the Marshall government is also committed to trialling mobile phone blocking technology in a regional prison. These are a suite of policies that have not only already improved the safety and security of our prisons but will continue to do so well into the future.

I commend the staff for the work they have done in helping implement this. I think the team has done a really great job. I know it is a bipartisan approach that we all want to make sure that our prisons are as safe as possible for all those who work in them and that we can have an environment that is more conducive to delivering on that 10by20 program and make sure we reduce recidivism.

Mr ODENWALDER: With your leave, I will read out the omnibus questions:

1. For each department and agency reporting to the minister:

What is the actual FTE count at 30 June 2019 and the projected actual FTE count for each year of the forward estimates?

What is the total employment cost for each year of the forward estimates?

What is the notional FTE job reduction target that has been agreed with Treasury for each year of the forward estimates?

Does the agency or department expect to meet the target in each year of the forward estimates?

How many TVSPs are estimated to be required to meet FTE reductions over the forward estimates?

2. Between 1 July 2018 and 30 June 2019, will the minister list the job title and total employment cost of each position with a total estimated cost of $100,000 or more which has either (1) been abolished and (2) which has been created.

3. Will the minister provide a detailed breakdown of expenditure on consultants and contractors above $10,000 between 1 July 2018 and 30 June 2019 for all departments and agencies reporting to the minister, listing:

the name of the consultant, contractor or service supplier;

cost;

work undertaken;

reason for engaging the contractor, and

method of appointment?

4. For each department and agency for which the minister has responsibility:

How many FTEs were employed to provide communication and promotion activities in 2018-19 and what was their employment expense?

How many FTEs are budgeted to provide communication and promotion activities in 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23 and what is their estimated employment expense?

The total cost of government-paid advertising, including campaigns, across all mediums in 2018-19 and budgeted cost for 2019-20.

5. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, please provide a full itemised breakdown of attraction and retention allowances as well as non-salary benefits paid to public servants and contracts between 1 July 2018 and 30 June 2019.

6. What is the title and total employment cost of each individual staff member in the minister's office as at 30 June 2019, including all departmental employees seconded to ministerial offices?

7. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, could you detail:

(a) How much was spent on targeted voluntary separation packages in 2018-19?

(b) What department funded these TVSPs? (except for DTF Estimates)

(c) What number of TVSPs were funded?

(d) What is the budget for targeted voluntary separation packages for financial years included in the forward estimates (by year), and how are these packages funded?

(e) What is the breakdown per agency/branch of targeted voluntary separation packages for financial years included in the forward estimates (by year) by FTEs?

8. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, how many executive terminations have occurred since 1 July 2018 and what is the value of executive termination payments made?

9. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, what new executive appointments have been made since 1 July 2018, and what is the annual salary, and total employment cost for each position?

10. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, how many employees have been declared excess, how long has each employee been declared excess, and what is the salary of each excess employee?

11. In the 2018-19 financial year, for all departments and agencies reporting to the minister, what underspending on operating programs (1) was and (2) was not approved by cabinet for carryover expenditure in 2019-20?

12. In the 2018-19 financial year, for all departments and agencies reporting to the minister, what underspending on investing or capital projects or programs (1) was and (2) was not approved by cabinet for carryover expenditure in 2019-20? How was much sought and how much was approved?

13. For each grant program or fund the minister is responsible for please provide the following information for 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22 financial years:

(a) Name of the program or fund;

(b) The purpose of the program or fund;

(c) Balance of the grant program or fund;

(d) Budgeted (or actual) expenditure from the program or fund;

(e) Budgeted (or actual) payments into the program or fund;

(f) Carryovers into or from the program or fund; and

(g) Details, including the value and beneficiary, of any commitments already made to be funded from the program or fund.

14. For the period of 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019, provide a breakdown of all grants paid by the department/agency that report to the minister, including when the payment was made to the recipient, and when the grant agreement was signed by both parties.

15. For each year of the forward estimates, please provide the name and budgeted expenditure across the 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23 financial years for each individual investing expenditure project administered by or on behalf of all departments and agencies reporting to the minister.

16. For each year of the forward estimates, please provide the name and budget for each individual program administered by or on behalf of all departments and agencies reporting to the minister.

17. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, what is the total cost of machinery of government changes since 1 July 2018 and please provide a breakdown of those costs?

18. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, what new sections of your department or agency have been established since 1 July 2018 and what is their purpose?

19. For each department and agency reporting to the minister:

What savings targets have been set for each year of the forward estimates?

What measures are you implementing to meet your savings target?

What is the estimated FTE impact of these measures?

I go to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 101, custodial services targets, and refer to the transition of the Adelaide Remand Centre to Serco. When is this intended to take place, minister? When is the changeover date?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That will be happening in the coming weeks.

Mr ODENWALDER: You do not have an exact date?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: At some stage in the week beginning 12 August.

Mr ODENWALDER: Minister, will Serco be required to follow the same suicide watch procedures as DCS, which were developed and have been updated to incorporate recommendations from the Coroner's inquest into the death in custody of Mark William Payne?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes.

Mr ODENWALDER: Excellent. Minister, will you rule out privatising any other prison or correctional facility over the forward estimates?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As we have been discussing—you bring up a great point, and it steers us back to our benchmarking process—this is why we want all those facilities and workers at those facilities to come on board with our benchmarking process, because—

Mr ODENWALDER: Will you rule out privatising any?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: If you listen—

Mr ODENWALDER: We have two minutes to go of this process, minister. Will you rule out privatising any?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: This is why I want—

Mr ODENWALDER: Any prison or any part of the Department for Correctional Services?

The CHAIR: Member for Elizabeth, you have asked your question. The minister is about to answer.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: This is why—and I drive back to this benchmarking—

Mr ODENWALDER: So you will not rule it out? It is a simple question.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Let me finish. This is why we drive back to this benchmarking situation. I have every faith that if these different institutions and the workers within these institutions come on board with the benchmarking philosophies, we will have the best prison system in the nation. I aspire even higher than that.

If we can deal with these efficiencies, we will have—and I go back to those numbers I talked about before in G4S and the Mount Gambier Prison, which is the contract most recently signed when your side was in government. They kept it in private hands, and it was running at $155 per person per day. This is in contrast to the $236. My goal, through benchmarking, is to bring that $236 down and deliver services that are, as I said, nation leading and potentially world leading—

Mr ODENWALDER: So you will not rule out privatising any further aspect of DCS?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: If we deliver the benchmarking processes, we will not have to do that.

Mr ODENWALDER: Has any preparatory work at all been done to look at the feasibility of privatising Yatala Labour Prison, any part of Yatala Labour Prison or any part of the community corrections system?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Mr ODENWALDER: No work at all?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will make this really clear. I will repeat it because I want to be really clear on this. Benchmarking is about making sure that we have the best practice. I am talking about the nation's best practice and I am talking—

Mr ODENWALDER: So why can you not just rule it out?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: —beyond that because we need to deliver this benchmarking, and that is why I am really keen to deliver it. I would love your support to get the workers and people involved on board with this program to deliver a better program for our prison system. That is what our focus is on: we want a better prison system. Again, I hark back to the numbers as an example. If we can get the best prison system in the nation—and, potentially, let's look beyond that and let's aspire even higher than that—if we can meet these benchmarks, if we can get this Better Prisons program working, we will not need to consider any of the options that you are throwing out there.

Mr ODENWALDER: If, for some reason, there is some blockage—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Do not be negative.

Mr ODENWALDER: —in the benchmarking system, you will reconsider and you will privatise?

The CHAIR: Order! Member for Elizabeth, this will be your final question. We have passed the allotted time. The minister will hear the question and then respond without interjection. Member for Elizabeth, you can ask the question.

Mr ODENWALDER: Are you saying that, if the benchmarking targets are not met, if you are not satisfied at the end of the benchmarking process that the savings and efficiencies that you desire are met, you will consider privatisation?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am saying that you are being very negative: I am being very positive.

Mr ODENWALDER: Please answer the question.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I back all the people involved to deliver these benchmarking targets. We will have the best prison system in the nation and potentially beyond our shores. That is what I aspire to do, that is what I aspire to deliver, and I would really love your support in making sure we can do that. I think that we can have a better prisons program, and that is what our government has put forward and invested in quite heavily.

There are 310 extra beds in the Northfield precinct. We have put $200 million into this project to deliver a better facility so that we can get better outcomes very much focused around 10by20, as I have mentioned before. Having these better facilities will deliver on that and make a better system for everyone involved. We have a great opportunity here. I look forward to your support in making sure we have a better prisons program in South Australia.

The CHAIR: We have reached the allotted time. I declare the examination of the proposed payments for the portfolio of Correctional Services to be completed.

Membership:

Ms Hildyard substituted for Mr Odenwalder.

Minister:

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

Departmental Advisers:

Ms K. Taylor, Chief Executive, Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing.

Mr I. Houridis, Director, Commonwealth Games Feasibility Secretariat, Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing.

Mr T. Nicholas, Acting Senior Manager, Strategy and Investment, Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing.

Ms R. Mo, Team Leader, Finance, Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing.

The ACTING CHAIR (Mr Pederick): Thank you for the confidence of the committee in electing me as Acting Chair. We are here in Estimates Committee A for the payments in relation to the portfolio of the Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing. Before I call on the minister to make a statement, I would like him to introduce his advisers.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Thank very much, Mr Acting Chair. It is great to see you in the seat, and I am sure you will do an outstanding job. Not overlooking how good the last Chair was, but you are looking fantastic.

I welcome on my far left Mr Ilia Houridis, Director, Commonwealth Games Feasibility Secretariat. On my immediate left and your right, I welcome Ms Kylie Taylor, Chief Executive, Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing, and on my right Mr Tim Nicholas, Acting Senior Manager, Strategy and Investment. I have no opening statement, Mr Acting Chair.

The ACTING CHAIR: Thank you, minister. I would just like to indicate to the committee that we will go to 3.50pm, just a few extra minutes allocated for the changeover of Chair. I call on the lead speaker of the opposition to make an opening statement if she so wishes.

Ms HILDYARD: Thank you, Mr Acting Chair. Minister, since coming to government you have not invested one extra dollar in grassroots sport and recreation. You have cut the $24 million female facilities program, the $10 million synthetic surfaces program, the $7.4 million of support for community clubs, $874,000 per annum from staffing and cut grant programs.

Unlike Labor, who provided record investment in sport, you seem to be at the whim of the Treasurer's obsession with cuts. Minister, how do you justify the financial crisis you have created to girls and boys, women and men and clubs across our state who see sport as a fundamental part of their engagement with community and of their physical and mental health and wellbeing?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Is that your opening statement?

Ms HILDYARD: And a question.

The ACTING CHAIR: Member for Reynell, is that a question?

Ms HILDYARD: A bit of both.

The ACTING CHAIR: If you are going to ask a question, please refer to a budget paper.

Ms HILDYARD: I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, page 36, the vision of the state object.

The ACTING CHAIR: Thank you. Could please ask the question again for the minister.

Ms HILDYARD: The whole thing?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, the second part.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, how do you justify the financial crisis in sport you have created to girls and boys, women and men and clubs across our state who see sport as a fundamental part of their engagement with community and of their physical and mental health and wellbeing?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I can tell this group, and I will go into some detail, given that it was a very long-winded, broadbrush statement that was not factually correct, and I will just elaborate on what we have done for clarification. Since coming into government, we have put more than $100 million into sport, and I am very proud about that.

One of the key pillars of what we did—given that when we came into government the previous government had not budgeted any money for the Sports Vouchers program—is that we worked really hard to make sure that we delivered on that. In fact, we actually upped it. The previous government had it at $50, and I make the point that they had no money allocated through the budget for that program. We put the $50 back in they had taken out, and then we put another $50 on top.

Our Sports Vouchers program delivers $100 to families who have primary school-age children who play sport, and we have included dancing into that program as well. This has been highly, highly successful, and in a second I will just clarify the figure of how much has gone out in vouchers. You can actually go to the dashboard and see how much each electorate has garnered from this.

I go to sporting clubs and sporting groups—in fact, I remember going to the Gymnastics SA awards this year, and it is always great to go to those sorts of events. I was a little humbled, perhaps even a little bit embarrassed, when they stood up and spoke about the $100 sports vouchers that our Marshall Liberal government had brought forward and the whole room started clapping. They were so elated and understood how important this is to getting young people active and getting young people playing.

This is a key pillar of what we have done. We know that it helps with the cost of living and we know that it helps getting young people active. It gets them into sports clubs and it gets them engaged in the community. We know that if we can get them in at a young age they can really understand what a sports club is about and how it operates, and it gives such good benefits back to society through health benefits, through social benefits and through being part of a community. Often if you can get people engaged at that young age they will go through and be part of it for a long time to come.

I will run through some of the other programs that we have invested in. We can talk about the soccer headquarters. This was a really great one out there at State Sports Park through the FFSA. This is a brilliant program. The proposal, and the development that is happening out there, is truly outstanding. Also, as part of that, there was an investment in the wind tunnel at the Super-Drome. There are great opportunities here for this.

Not only does it keep the elite cycling program here in South Australia—and we are really proud of our cycling—but it also has the ability to grow the venue. We improved the lighting and heating and those amenities at the facility. The lighting now—I got feedback just the other day—is better than they could have expected. We are hoping that will help attract more events and increase the cycling capacity and the multiuse capacity at that facility at Gepps Cross.

I know a number of local members worked really hard on the Women's Memorial Playing Fields. The member for Elder has been very focused on this. This is developing another great piece of sporting infrastructure here, and we are working to deliver on that. I think it is $8 million or $9 million, if my memory serves me correctly. That is a wonderful facility. On top of that, we put $10 million into Memorial Drive. This is fantastic.

I do not want to jump the gun, but when it comes to women's sport in particular, I have been probably more excited than my wife would like about the fact that I am really keen to see this WTA event come to South Australia, as well as an ATP event. By investing $10 million and putting a roof on Memorial Drive, we now have an undercover facility in Adelaide—we did not have one before now for tennis players—so our future Lleyton Hewitts and Alicia Moliks have somewhere to train and we have the ability to get this WTA ATP tennis event to South Australia.

I know they are working really hard at trying to attract key players, and some of the names that are being bandied around are so exciting it is not funny. You may or may not have spent some time watching Wimbledon and the French Open more recently, but personally—and I know the chief executive probably gets sick of me talking about it—I think that some of the exciting athletes, the female athletes, particularly on the world stage at the moment, are literally taking the world by storm.

The tennis players are absolutely outstanding, and we have some great Australian tennis players in there as well. Ash Barty winning the French Open was just phenomenal, and to see Simona Halep win Wimbledon recently was just awesome. Of course, she has an affiliation with Darren Cahill, who is a South Australian coach. There is an ability for these facilities to develop coaches and players and have these pathways. We have had the men's tournament before. I do not think it will be quite as exciting as the women's tournament, to be brutally honest, but I think it will be a massive drawcard. It goes with the women's golf we have here as well. These opportunities are really exciting.

That leads me into the program which I am equally as proud of and which has been so successful, and that is our Grassroots Football, Cricket and Netball Facility Program. I want to thank footy and cricket for coming on board and contributing money for this. They saw the benefit of partnering with netball as well. These are some of the biggest growth sports that we have for women in particular.

The member for Reynell has talked about this and about female facilities, and I think we are on the same page but we have a slightly different view on it and, again, I am really proud of where we are going with this. Whenever I go to these clubs, and even when dealing with some of the carryover grants, we talk about facilities. They have growing numbers of females playing at their clubs and they want to improve their facilities, and I can appreciate that because over the last decade or more they have been allowed to run down. Everywhere I go and everyone I listen to and talk to, I see and hear that these facilities are in a poor state of disrepair.

We have put our program together. We are partnering with them. We put $15 million in last year's budget and football and cricket have come along with $1 million each. We are doing it as a match-funding project, so councils actually buy into this now as well, or local sporting groups do, and they are matching it. Everyone has skin in the game and it is getting us really, really good results. When I go to these places and make the announcements, I let them know that we are going to partner with them and bring together the facility.

I look at one here: half a million dollars to the Hackham Football Club, a football club in the south. It has struggled. It has struggled for a senior men's team. It has grown its women's football, which has been absolutely outstanding. Even better than that, they have gone back to their roots, literally, and they are developing their junior football all the way through for girls and for boys and they are doing a great job at building their football club.

When we talked about facilities, I said, 'Were you looking for female facilities, or were you looking for unisex facilities?' The focus is on unisex facilities because they are facilities that everyone can use. The thought of having a club that has change rooms over here for women and change rooms over here for men and segregating them like that does not make sense to all the clubs I speak to. They say, 'Let's make them transferable so that everyone can use them.' That is what we have seen is a big part of this Grassroots Football, Cricket and Netball Facility Program.

We have been able to deliver these change rooms that they can rotate people through. You might have a weekend where you have back-to-back women's or girls' games going on and the next week you might have back-to-back boys' games going on. It makes no sense to say, 'Alright, this week we're using these change rooms and they're being left over to the side, and next week we're using those change rooms and these ones are being left over to the side.' Every club has been very focused on making sure we have these facilities that can be used by everyone, that they are interchangeable.

Another thing that comes up when I speak to people at these clubs is that they say, in the case of football, 'Often we've got a lot of dads coaching daughters.' Actually, what is growing now is that when it gets to Auskick mums are doing a lot of those roles as well; they are coaching sons. The flip-flop happens in netball and football and cricket is happening all over the place. We welcome that, we embrace that, and having these unisex facilities allows us to include everyone. It has been fantastic.

I will just run through some of the other facilities. The Berri Football Club has $149,000 to upgrade their change rooms and improve the parent change room, and the City of Port Adelaide Enfield was ecstatic to get $500,000 towards theirs, as well. Tea Tree Gully—

Ms Hildyard interjecting:

The ACTING CHAIR: Minister, just hold there. I am hearing a few murmurs on my left. You did ask a very broad-ranging question, and the minister did not make an opening statement, so he has a reasonable amount of free rein to answer the question.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Thank you, Acting Chair. I am just going through them here. I was asked what we are doing for sport, and there was an accusation that we have not put any money in, so I will go back again: Berri, $149,000; the City of Onkaparinga, half a million dollars there for Hackham that I talked about; the City of Port Adelaide Enfield for the L.J. Lewis and Edward Smith Precinct out there at Northfield. It was great to go out and see those guys, and one of the cricketers out there—I think Sonny was his name—was just over the moon that this facility would actually deliver.

It is set up at Greenacres in a really great spot. They are lucky enough to have two ovals side by side. They have rugby goals on them, and football can be played there, as well as cricket. Likewise, up in the top oval they have some temporary change facilities there now because of the growth there. The growth opportunity is just out of this world. I know that the member for Torrens would be very much across that one and know how great the facility is going to be.

Tea Tree Gully at Hope Valley, with their facilities out there, are doing a great job growing junior sport, and girls are taking hold there as well. Eudunda Sporting Club is a really great development out there, and there is $200,000 to them for umpire change rooms and medical change rooms as well as parent change spaces. This is really important.

In an interesting twist—the CE of Sport and Recreation and I have talked about this a lot—that people think that the change table goes in the women's change rooms or bathrooms, but how is that going to help women play more sport? A lot of the clubs are thinking smart now and making sure that there is one in the men's and one in the women's. If it is a heterosexual couple and the mother is playing sport that day and the father is looking after the child, great, he has the facilities and he can take the baby. It is subliminal stuff. If mothers think—

Ms Hildyard interjecting:

The ACTING CHAIR: The minister is answering a question. He has the call.

Ms HILDYARD: I know, but he just does not understand. It is so frustrating.

The ACTING CHAIR: Member for Reynell, it is not open season. The minister has the call.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Thank you, Acting Chair. The point I am making is that by having a great diversity in opportunity, if a woman thinks that she cannot play because she cannot get her child looked after that is just not on. That is not the environment we want to create at any sporting club. It is little things like that I think are really clever, and it is a great thing.

Flinders Park Football Club, as well, is constructing new change rooms. The team that worked on this is truly delightful. They worked so hard for this development, and what they are going to deliver there will be through the roof. They have an opportunity to expand and grow the netball clubs there. It is a great footy/cricket/netball community group.

A delightful lady there—excuse me for forgetting her name at this moment—told me a story about how the club nurtured and helped her kids and gave her great help and support when she was raising her kids. They were very much actively involved in the club. They have all grown up now and she is giving back to that local community, giving back to that sporting organisation. She helped raise the money for this grant, and it was wonderful to see tears in her eyes as we handed over that $225,000—or as good as.

There is $153,000 for Kalangadoo, another one that has been looking for an expansion. Karoonda has $258,000. Chair, you were there when we were looking at that one. It is a great opportunity for the Karoonda Districts Football Club. They were looking at unisex change rooms, and they talked about how, in a country area, the clubroom is the heart and soul of the local community. Again, this is delivering financial support to get the facilities that these clubs are looking for, which is what you asked me about in the question.

Port Broughton Combined Sporting Clubs Incorporated and the Barossa Council both have $350,000 each for more unisex change rooms. Whyalla has $890,000, or just over. This is about improving the playing surface as much as it is about putting in change rooms and lighting. Those two ovals are used extensively by the community. This will make sure that they actually have drainage and they can start to par so that teams are not forced off the oval in the middle of winter when there is not sufficient drainage. It is also to make sure that there is grass on the oval when they are playing there in summer. There is also the ability, potentially, for netball to utilise the facilities in those community clubs. It brings all that together.

West Lakes Shore has $3,000 to expand their change rooms to make them unisex as well. Woodville West Torrens Football Club has $288,000, and this is a great opportunity out at Ottoway. I think the women's football team are looking to base themselves there, but they will flip-flop again. They want to be able to play games at Woodville Oval as well but also use the Ottoway facility. By upgrading these and making them more unisex, they will become fundamentally family-friendly facilities—it is what we want families to use.

To say that we have not invested money in sport is so incredibly wrong and misleading. We are really proud of what we have been able to deliver and what we will continue to deliver. I have not gone on to talk about our free volunteer screening checks. As well as those things in this portfolio area, I have racing. We have contributed $24 million to the racing industry to help them become more sustainable. That has been really big, and in the time that we have been in government more than $28 million has gone to racing. They have never before seen an injection of funds like that, particularly over the last 16 years under the previous government.

If we talk to recreation, we have done some great work in this space. Again, it is not about injecting money, but money can help make these projects work. We have put $11.8 million into recreation, into trails and parks. That has of course been done in conjunction with the Minister for Environment. That is where our portfolios can cross over to get good outcomes for South Australia. We have also put money into those projects for mountain biking groups and walking groups.

We did a survey not so long ago to reach out to the community, and more than 2,000 people took part. They talked to us about wanting sporting facilities. We understand that sport is important, but recreation is a big part of this as well. I think 86 per cent of people said that walking was one of the key things they did. By investing in these walking trails and mountain biking trails along the Fleurieu and right around our state—and the minister will talk about O'Halloran Hill, Glenthorne Farm and Glenthorne National Park and the project that is evolving there—we really are investing in the health and recreation of South Australians. There have been some absolutely outstanding results.

It is really important that we focus on what we have done, and I think I have outlined a lot of that. We will continue to do that across the Sport, Recreation and Racing portfolio areas.

The ACTING CHAIR: Minister, are you happy to accept the omnibus questions from the previous portfolios for this portfolio, or do you want them read out again?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, I will accept those.

The ACTING CHAIR: That will save a bit of time, thank you. Member for Reynell.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, what do you think of the quantum and percentage of funding that sport and recreation receives through gambling revenue? Have you specifically advocated for a bigger proportion of that revenue?

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

Ms HILDYARD: It is in the stated objective.

The ACTING CHAIR: What page?

Ms HILDYARD: Page 36.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Whereabouts on page 36?

Ms HILDYARD: I am talking about your vision around funding for sport and recreation.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Where is that referred to in the budget paper?

Ms HILDYARD: That is why am asking.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, we are here doing budget estimates. You have to refer your questions to the budget papers. Which reference is it?

Ms HILDYARD: Page 36.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Yes, page 36, but what reference? Where is the reference to the budget paper? I am very happy to talk about—

Ms HILDYARD: We can reference the grants line, because it is about what funding comes to sport and recreation.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Do you want me to talk about the grants that we are giving?

Ms HILDYARD: No. What I want you to answer is: what do you think about the proportion of funding from gambling revenue for sport and recreation, which goes to the grants program, page 37. Have you specifically advocated for a bigger proportion of funding from gambling revenue—yes or no?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Chair, can I just clarify—

The ACTING CHAIR: I think the minister is chasing a specific budget line, thank you, member for Reynell.

Ms HILDYARD: The grants line on page 37, in that case.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am still very unclear about the line of questioning here. Are you asking for my opinion, or are you pointing out a budget line here that you want me to talk to?

Ms HILDYARD: I will just move on. I do not think there is an understanding there. Minister, how does CPI apply to sport and recreation grants?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: In what terms? As in how did it apply under the previous government and how it applies now?

Ms HILDYARD: How does it apply right now to sport and recreation grants?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I seek clarification here on what programs over the journey have been indexed. I am led to believe that a proportion of the CRSFP has been indexed over the journey under the previous government and under our government and that is fundamentally all that has had the index—and Active Club indexes on the SMA deal that was done, when that money is attributed. That is indexed not to CPI, but it is indexed. They are the only ones. The only other one that has received a CPI index is VACSWIM. I am led to believe that happened last financial year under the new government.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, has CPI been increased on grants in last year's budget and this year's budget?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, I think I just explained that. I apologise that I may not have been clear. It has never been across the—

Ms HILDYARD: So it has not been—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Let me finish. It has never been under the previous government or under this government, other than CRSFP, which has had a proportion indexed to CPI. A portion of that fund was indexed to CPI. The Active Club grant, as I said, is indexed under the deal that was done when that was implemented and put in place, and that is to do with the stadium management, as you would be aware. The only other one that has received a CPI increase, under the previous government or this government, is VACSWIM and that was under our government at the last budget.

Ms HILDYARD: How do CPI increases apply to grants for funding for 12 months or less?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I apologise, I am not really clear on your question. I thought I answered that last about all the grants.

Ms HILDYARD: You did not.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am referring to all the grants. All the grants that are distributed through the Office of Rec and Sport—again I stress the point and apologise if I have not been clear—are a proportion of CRSFP and it is Active Club as well through their own indexation, not through CPI. A portion of CRSFP is indexed through CPI, and VACSWIM was indexed through CPI under your government, when you were in government, and it has continued on the same, except for the increase in VACSWIM.

Ms HILDYARD: Thank you. Minister, did anyone declare a conflict of interest when the racing industry package was developed and discussed in cabinet?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I cannot discuss what happened in cabinet.

Ms HILDYARD: What conditions have been put on the racing industry assistance package—

The ACTING CHAIR: Member for Reynell, can you please read a volume reference, what budget paper and a line?

Ms HILDYARD: Pages 36 and 37 in relation to the racing industry package. It is mentioned several times.

The ACTING CHAIR: Thank you. I am just trying to keep it orderly.

Ms HILDYARD: To be clear for your sake, Acting Chair, I have a number of questions. The racing industry package is mentioned several times on pages 36 and 37.

The ACTING CHAIR: Thank you. Let's run with that.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, what conditions have been put on the racing industry assistance package? Are there any conditions precedent and are there ongoing conditions that the racing industry is required to meet—conditions precedent and conditions ongoing.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: You had three or four questions there all in one. I will just do them one at a time, so do you want to go with your first question first? What is the first question?

Ms HILDYARD: What are the conditions precedent put on the racing industry assistance package and what are the ongoing conditions?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What do you mean by 'precedent'?

Ms HILDYARD: Conditions precedent.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What do you mean by 'conditions precedent'?

Ms HILDYARD: Conditions that the funding is contingent on I guess is the way I would describe that.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: So you are asking what conditions are there—

Ms HILDYARD: Precedent and then ongoing.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Not precedent, just what conditions are there to the funding?

Ms HILDYARD: No, I guess the way I would describe conditions precedent is conditions that are contingent on the funding being delivered, and are there ongoing conditions?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: To clarify, you want to know about the conditions for the funding, the $24 million that our government gave to the racing industry. What we have done is that $8 million has gone up-front. I think that was given to the racing industry before the last financial year. It is then distributed amongst the three codes in a formula that they have agreed to. To the best of my knowledge, that will be split so that half of that will be spent on infrastructure. They will be upgrading infrastructure to grow their industry and make it more sustainable. The other half they will be able to use for projects and programs, which will come for checking to make sure that we are growing the industry. The other proportion is yet to be ratified, but I will take that on notice and get you the detail accordingly.

Ms HILDYARD: So you will take that on notice?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The second part, yes. What was part 2 of that question, sorry?

Ms HILDYARD: In assessing the value of the racing industry, did you receive advice about the amount of government revenue generated by the industry, and can you advise the committee what that figure is?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I think that question is probably better directed, for the value perspective, to the Treasurer, so I will take that on notice and get that figure back to you.

Ms HILDYARD: I suspect you might want this next question on notice as well. Did your agency receive details of any modelling done on the revenue impacts of changing the rate of the betting consumption tax? If so, what did that modelling show regarding the levels of 8, 10 and 15 per cent? I already have a note that you might want that one on notice.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, with the greatest of respect, taxation is a matter for the Treasurer, so it is potentially a better question for the Treasurer.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, what investigations has your government undertaken into the governance, financial status and operations of the South Australian Harness Racing Club?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: To be clear, the way the position of the Minister for Racing has been up until now is that we do not have any control or oversight over any of the racing industry; that is the way the legislation is written. What you are talking about would actually sit with Consumer and Business.

Ms HILDYARD: With whom?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Consumer and Business. It would sit with that portfolio area.

Ms HILDYARD: So has there been an investigation—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, again, that sits with Consumer and Business, so not to my knowledge, but that is not something that the racing minister—

Ms HILDYARD: Will you take it on notice?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, because that would need to be a question for the minister in charge of Consumer and Business.

Ms HILDYARD: Should there be an investigation happening and recommendations come from that investigation, I dare say that those recommendations would come to you as the racing minister. Will you implement any recommendations from any review?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Your question is hypothetical.

Ms HILDYARD: Are you aware, minister, of any SA Harness Racing clubs' stated intention to sell its key asset, its land?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, which budget paper are you referring to? Which budget line about harness racing?

Ms HILDYARD: The same as I indicated to the Chair before in relation to racing.

The ACTING CHAIR: The general racing referrals.

Ms HILDYARD: There are a number of references to racing.

The ACTING CHAIR: It is on pages 36 and 37, I believe.

Ms HILDYARD: Yes, that is right.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: How is that line related to the selling of assets that you are talking about?

Ms HILDYARD: As I understand it, you have provided a racing industry assistance package, so I am very interested in the operations of the various codes.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Just to be clear, we did not provide that to the harness racing club.

Ms HILDYARD: I understand that, but that is not what I said. What I said was that you have provided a racing industry assistance package and my question is: are you aware of the intention of one of the key clubs in the racing industry to sell its key asset, its land?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, to be clear, as racing minister I have no bearing over a club. You are asking me about a club and I have no bearing over a club.

Ms HILDYARD: You seemed to talk about a lot of clubs earlier.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The question is about a racing club.

Ms HILDYARD: Maybe you could just take it on notice.

The ACTING CHAIR: The minister has the call.

Ms HILDYARD: Maybe take it on notice. It might be the easiest way to deal with it.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

The ACTING CHAIR: Hang on, the minister has the call.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, my answer is that I have no bearing over the club. In fact, as I outlined before, the racing minister, as it stands, has no bearing over the actual industry bodies themselves, but they—

Ms HILDYARD: That is interesting.

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

Ms HILDYARD: But you put conditions precedent on their funding.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is what we are saying. They are coming to us for funding and we have agreed to funding to the code—not to the club, to the code.

Ms HILDYARD: I understand.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: We have put some conditions on how that is spent. Again, we are investing in the industry, in the code, so we have put some—

Ms HILDYARD: I understand.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: —stipulations around how that is spent, but that does not impact on the club. The industry will work with the clubs. We are working with the industry. Those provisos around the funding are the only way that we can have that input or say in what we are doing. Under the legislation, I have no control over what the industry does.

Ms HILDYARD: What is the government's involvement in any potential sale of land at Morphettville Racecourse, and have you provided any assistance to date?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not own land at Morphettville Racecourse. As the minister, I do not own the land at Morphettville Racecourse.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, which specific positions will be cut this year as a result of the $874,000 per annum cut to staffing at the Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing? That is from Budget Paper 5, page 81.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Budget Paper 5, page 81.

Ms HILDYARD: I am sure you know that savings measure very well, minister.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am informed that the department is still going through that, but fundamentally it will be back office staff, and that is yet to be finalised.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, how much of the $874,000 per annum represents redundancy entitlements or other severance payments?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That is yet to be finalised.

Ms HILDYARD: Thank you. Minister, can you rule out any further cuts to—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, what budget paper and what budget line?

Ms HILDYARD: It is actually the same one. Minister, can you rule out any further cuts to staffing beyond the $874,000 per annum that you have cut from staffing at the Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It is very clear in the budget paper. The details are outlined on page 81.

Ms HILDYARD: Can you rule out any further cuts to staffing beyond—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: The details are outlined in that budget paper; that is what they are. They are what they are.

Ms HILDYARD: Okay, so no.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, it is very clear on page 81, as you pointed out. The efficiencies, the operating expenses and the full-time equivalents are outlined very clearly there. It was outlined on budget day.

Ms HILDYARD: I refer to page 36, in relation to grants.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Which budget paper, sorry?

Ms HILDYARD: Page 36, in relation to grants.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Which budget paper?

The ACTING CHAIR: I am sorry, member for Reynell, could you please say volume and book.

Ms HILDYARD: You know well which—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, I actually don't.

Ms HILDYARD: Volume 4. You do not know?

The ACTING CHAIR: Just to help out, I think I will help everyone here: it is Budget Paper 4, Volume 4. Thank you.

Ms HILDYARD: It is Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, page 36.

The ACTING CHAIR: That is where we need to go. I am not trying to be too pedantic, but just to help everyone on the committee, that is what we need to do.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Thank you, Acting Chair.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, what is the difference between achieving gender equity in sport and gender equality in sport?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, which line are you talking about?

Ms HILDYARD: The grants line. Minister, what is the difference between achieving gender equity in sport and gender equality in sport?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not see that in the grants line.

Ms HILDYARD: On pages 36 and 37, there are repeated references to cutting funds from the female facilities program—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, there are no references—

Ms HILDYARD: —and references to your grassroots facilities program, so if you can please tell me what the difference is between gender equity and gender equality in sport.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, I do not see that line in the budget paper. I am not meaning to be tricky. If you have a line in the budget paper, I am happy to answer a question, but here in the budget paper you are talking about it says:

Undertake a grants review to ensure grant programs are aligned to sector need and the government's strategic direction

Is that what you are referring to?

Ms HILDYARD: There are several references.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Can you point it out, please?

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, if you cannot answer the question, we will just move on.

The ACTING CHAIR: Just to help out, the minister was quite fulsome in doing a comparison of female facilities in grassroots funding before. I am sure if you have 15 minutes, we can do it all again. Ask another question, please.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am happy to answer to answer the question.

Ms HILDYARD: No, I will ask a more specific question: minister, how does your grassroots facilities program achieve equity, given that it does not actually target a group that has been historically disadvantaged and not able to equally participate? Equity.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I will not go back over all the projects and programs, but what we have made really clear through this project and program is that we want to be inclusive of everyone. We want to make sure that we have facilities for everyone—for families, whatever shape, size, colour, creed, whatever—

Ms HILDYARD: Just like the female facilities program did.

The ACTING CHAIR: Order!

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: We want to make sure that we have facilities for everyone in the community to use and that we can get the best return on them. That is the basis for the grassroots program. When I go to communities, that is what people talk about a lot. I know it was a program initiated by the previous government and we are very happy to adopt it and support it as well, but as far as clubs and organisations, going without the 40:40:20 model, we know that is a really important thing to do. We have been supportive of that and, in working with the office, we are pushing that in every direction to make sure we get better governance and better understanding.

As we go out and communicate with clubs and sporting groups in the sport and recreation sector, we want to make sure we are getting more and more people involved across every level. We actually want to be as inclusive as possible. We want to welcome everyone into this sector, and that is something I am really focused on doing. I do not think we can include people by excluding people. I think we want to look at ways of including people by bringing them in and making people aware of how we go about doing that.

I was just at the Goodwood Saints Football Club the other week, and they have been a leading football club in inclusion when it comes to people with a disability. Their program is a state leader—I say it is a national leader and would argue that it would be outstanding on a world scale—and they do a really great job of bringing people into their club.

I think that is something we really need to be focused on. With that 40:40:20 direction to make sure that boards have that split, I think that we are going a long way towards making sure that clubs and sporting organisations have the thinking and the diversity that they need and want. That will make our society a better society.

We are also developing the Game On program, and I have been really passionate about this. It is going wonderfully well, and I hope that you are getting involved and engaged. We are reaching out to the community to ask, 'What does sport look like? How can sport look, and how can we share these ideas, concepts and visions?' When we have a group like the Goody Saints Footy Club doing it over here, how can we deliver that and/or take that model and concept and say, 'This community over here may be able to use that model and bring other people into their clubs as well'?

It is about changing their thinking on what we want clubs to look like. I am showing my age now, but I grew up in the country at a time when a sporting club was literally a tin shed. Someone put up a tin shed, a couple of showers and away we went from there. Then someone must have got an esky and a barbecue. A lot of them still have those sorts of facilities, but we are doing everything that we can to upgrade them. That was the mindset, but then it grew into being more.

The point I am trying to make is that what a sporting club was then is not what it is now. Through Game On, we are reaching out to the community and saying, 'What do you want sporting clubs to look like in your area? What do you want them to look like and how can it work?' This opportunity to make sporting clubs inclusive of everyone is a really key focus. The Game On project is going really well along with our state sports infrastructure plan. We have invested heavily in that.

I think that the outcomes are going to be fantastic and give us a real understanding of what South Australia wants. This work has never been done before—not for the last 15 or 16 years. By doing this work, we will have a really good picture and vision of how we want our sporting clubs to look and what the community wants them to look like, and we can deliver on that.

The ACTING CHAIR: Member for Reynell, you get some more questions on this line. I can see that the member for Florey will be pretty keen in a minute. We will go with the member for Reynell.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, as you know, South Adelaide Football Club are back-to-back SANFL women's premiers. They do not have a women's change room. They do not have access to council funding. They do not have access to club funding and so cannot apply for your facilities program, which has less funds than our $24 million program. What is your advice to them? They are excluded, a situation that you have just said you do not want to see in sport. They are excluded.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I would very much encourage them to be part of our Game On project. I think that is really important. I would encourage them to talk to council because—

Ms HILDYARD: They have.

The ACTING CHAIR: Hang on, the minister has the call.

Ms HILDYARD: They have said no.

The ACTING CHAIR: The minister has the call.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: It is not my fault if council have said no. I would encourage them to talk to council again. Council are a big part of our Game On strategy. That is something that we can do and are happy to work with these communities on, talking to councils and having a look at the bigger picture area, saying, 'Where does the investment need to be?' One that I referred to before was the Onkaparinga council, which is where the South Adelaide Football Club is. The council clearly chose to focus on the Hackham Football Club as a priority over South Adelaide, which is the council's prerogative to do.

Again, through Game On, I would very much encourage them to get involved. If they have not already been to one of the sessions—I think there was one down your way; it may have been late last week—they can contact the office. They can also submit online. We would love to get their thoughts and have the submission done that way. We are very open to talk to them. Unfortunately, when we came into government, I went to a number of places where people showed me facilities that have been left to run down. There are 10, 20, 30, 40, hundreds of them that have not had the support in the past.

Ms HILDYARD: They were in the last grant funding round that you cut, Corey. They were in the last round that you cut, actually.

The ACTING CHAIR: Member for Reynell, order! You might have all these thoughts, but while the minister—

Ms HILDYARD: No, it is a fact: they were in the last round that was cut.

The ACTING CHAIR: No, I am sorry, but you do not get the time for rebuttal. This is not a to-and-fro chat. If I give you the call, you will have the call. The minister has the call if he is still answering the question.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Thank you, Acting Chair. The point I was making was that I go to clubs right across the state, and there are a lot that need uplift. My heart goes out to all of them whenever I go there. They are all really good clubs with really good causes doing really good things—I do not dispute that—but you cannot do them all at once. Your government could not do them all in 16 years; I appreciate that. You would understand that as well. We need to have a plan and we need to have a strategy for how we are going to deliver the right facilities to the right communities to make sure that we are including everyone and getting everyone playing sport.

My focus is on getting as many people as possible playing sport; I think it is really important. That is what this is about; it is about actually having a plan. If you just scattergun around, you will find that everyone wants more, trust me, and you would have experienced that when you were in government. What we need is a plan and a strategy and to deliver against the plan to make sure that we are getting as much as we can right across the state to all the people who need it. We need to make sure that we are helping everyone with the resources they need that will actually get more people active and more people playing sport across whatever level.

Ms WORTLEY: Minister, when will the government deliver on the promise—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, what budget paper and what line?

Ms WORTLEY: Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, pages 17, 36 and 37.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Page 17?

Ms WORTLEY: Yes, and pages 36 and 37. When will the government deliver—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Three pages?

Ms WORTLEY: —on the promise made by the Liberal candidate for Torrens at the 2018 state election to the Gaza Football Club that a Liberal government would match Labor's commitment of $1.5 million to upgrade the change facilities to accommodate female players?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I cannot see that in the budget papers that you are referring to. I cannot see that specific information in the budget papers you are referring to.

Ms WORTLEY: The information is in relation to—

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Point of order.

The ACTING CHAIR: You have a point of order, member for Light?

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Yes, Mr Acting Chairman. If we are going to read the actual rules about the questions in that way, then there will be no questions asked.

The ACTING CHAIR: Let me work it out. I am trying to give a bit of free rein. I have not intervened yet. I am trying to be equitable here, so if everyone can work with me. Thank you, member for Torrens; do you want to make a further commentary?

Ms WORTLEY: Yes. Page 17, if it assists the minister, makes reference to the provision of funding, and then pages 36 and 37 relate to female facilities, grassroots football and the Cricket Family Friendly Facilities Program.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: To answer your question, they have not applied through that program. I have not seen an application come through the department to me through the programs you talked about before. When you talk about page 17 and the investing expenditure summary, again I have spoken about some of these projects, and I can continue to do so. With respect to the Adelaide Super-Drome, $9.8 million went into that, and that is not the project you talk about. With respect to soccer, there is $19 million going into the home of football—

Ms WORTLEY: No, it is the Gaza Football Club program that I question.

The ACTING CHAIR: Order! The minister has the right to answer the question how he sees fit. If the member for Torrens has another question, she can ask that question, or is the minister still completing that answer?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I just want to clarify, because I do apologise—

Ms WORTLEY: Excuse me.

The ACTING CHAIR: Hang on. It is not 'excuse me'. The minister has the call.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am looking through the budget papers, and—

Ms HILDYARD: Point of order.

The ACTING CHAIR: Point of order, member for Reynell. Sorry, minister.

Ms HILDYARD: Point of order: I heard the member for Torrens quite clearly state the exact page and the exact line, so I am not quite sure why we are now referring and proposing there is some confusion about which line and moving on to talking about completely different sports when she has very clearly asked a question—

The ACTING CHAIR: Thank you, member for Reynell. It is up to the minister how he answers the question. Thank you, minister.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I take that point. I am looking at the exact page she talks about, and there is no reference to the Gaza Football Club or anything else on here. I mentioned it already, but the home of football at State Sports Park is getting $19 million; the SA Athletics Stadium, over $2 million; the Women's Memorial Playing Fields, $8 million; and the Super-Drome, $9 million. There are a number of projects there.

You talk about the grants page as well, and the answer I am giving to that level is that I have not received a grant application from the Gaza Football Club about that. You refer to a letter or a commitment. I have not seen that letter or commitment. As far as I am aware, it does not exist. It is not in the budget papers.

Ms WORTLEY: Minister, I asked—

The ACTING CHAIR: The minister has the call, so you can ask a question in a minute, unless the minister is finished.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: What I will finish with is that I have not seen what you are talking about, and it does not appear in these budget papers.

Ms WORTLEY: I have asked this question previously in this chamber on numerous occasions, and you were going to get back to me with an answer, so I took the opportunity today to ask that question.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: And I appreciate that. The question you asked me is not in the budget papers. I appreciate that, but my answer to you is that I have no knowledge of what you are talking about. I have not seen it exist.

The ACTING CHAIR: The member for Florey.

Ms BEDFORD: I refer to Budget 4, Volume 4, page 37, under synthetic sporting surfaces. The Modbury Bowling Club has benefited from a major upgrade—for which I am sure it is very grateful—to be opened this weekend, but there is no word on funding needed for the all-weather covering to ensure that there is maximum use of this facility. I understand negotiations were well underway with council for a dollar-for-dollar commitment prior to the 28 March date that concerns us all. I ask where those negotiations now sit with council to make sure we have full use of this really significant investment in the north-east.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I have been out there. I thank you for the very good question. It is a great facility. The crew has done an outstanding job. I cannot speak for council; I do not know what negotiations council have had with the Modbury Bowling Club. I cannot speak to that.

Ms BEDFORD: As recently as today, I can assure you, they are still interested in matching you dollar for dollar.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Sorry, what was the other part?

Ms BEDFORD: They are still interested in doing some sort of dollar-for-dollar deal.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Have they put in a grant application through the CRSFP?

Ms BEDFORD: As far as I know, it still sits where it sat before, which was they had done that. I am just asking if you are aware of it, and if the answer is no we will make sure they do that for you.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I appreciate that. Just to clarify the process, it sounds like you are saying that they have put in an application through one of the grant funds. I do not know where that is at. I do not have oversight of that. The department works through that.

The ACTING CHAIR: Just while the minister is getting some information, it is on page 37, dot point 4, in relation to synthetic sporting surfaces—2017-18, I think it is.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: Has the club actually been mentioned in the line?

The ACTING CHAIR: It is in the line: synthetic sporting surfaces.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO: No—

The ACTING CHAIR: No, I am the Chair. I am running the show. We are just waiting for the minister to answer the question.

Members interjecting:

The ACTING CHAIR: Order!

Members interjecting:

The ACTING CHAIR: Order! I have had some very broad references to the budget papers from the member for Reynell, so I do not think we will go down that path. Back to the minister.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Thank you very much. Yes, it is a great sporting service. That is fantastic. We are very supportive of that. If they have put in an application, they will have to contact the office to find out where the application is at in the process. I do not have that information in front of me. I am happy to have a look at that to see where it is along the process line.

Ms BEDFORD: Under the same budget paper and so forth, what assistance can your department or office give in the form of advice or administrative support to state bodies to ensure their success? In particular, I mean calisthenics, which, as you know, owns the Royalty Theatre. Across government, arts does not seem to be able to speak to sport to make sure that we get a good outcome for both sport and arts in this facility, which is used by women in a mass participation sport, which is getting no help at all because it owns the building.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: There are a couple of elements. One is that I will again mention the Sports Vouchers program, which has expanded to dancing—and calisthenics fits in there as well—to get young people active and involved in the sport you are so passionate about. As far as the facility is concerned, it is not a facility owned by me; clearly, it is a facility owned by someone else. I am very happy to work with you offline because that would be something that again would fit with our infrastructure plan. We could have a look at where it fits in that scope of things, and it probably fits out of this portfolio area in Infrastructure SA as well, where they may consider it in their infrastructure area. I will get someone from the department to contact—

Ms BEDFORD: That would be good because they are not really after money per se but they need your assistance.

The ACTING CHAIR: The minister is answering the question.

Ms BEDFORD: He is happy; he is not cross.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am. I understand what you are saying, and I am very happy to put you in touch with the department to work out how we can bring that together and make it part of the Game On program and the infrastructure plan as well. I am happy to help out, and I appreciate your passion for calisthenics.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, what is the status of the Port Noarlunga community sports complex project for upgrade and redevelopment of their facilities? Should council provide matching funding, will you fund that project?

The ACTING CHAIR: Do you have a budget line?

Ms HILDYARD: In the grants.

The ACTING CHAIR: What page and volume?

Ms HILDYARD: Pages 36 and 37.

The ACTING CHAIR: Of?

Ms HILDYARD: Volume 4, paper 4.

The ACTING CHAIR: Thank you.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Similar to my last answer to the member for Florey, there is a process for anyone who wants to apply for a grant; it is an independent process. You apply for the grant and the process is outlined on the website. They are more than welcome to apply for any grant they see fit—

Ms HILDYARD: What conversations—

The ACTING CHAIR: The minister is answering the question.

Ms HILDYARD: I think he is finished. Minister, what conversations have you had with the club about that project?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, I am searching for the budget line. What you are getting at here is where are they at in the process of applying for a grant. What they need to do is go to the Office for Recreation and Sport—the website is there—and have a look at what the criteria are for the grant they are applying for, make the application for that grant, and we will go through the process.

If someone from the member for Light's electorate wants to make an application for a grant, they can do the same thing. They are all measured up against one another, they are evaluated out and then the grants are awarded.

Ms HILDYARD: I will move to another area. What exactly, in dollar figures, was the loss the Lifesaving World Championships and/or Surf Life Saving SA incurred as a result of the storm?

The ACTING CHAIR: What budget line?

Ms HILDYARD: It is in relation to grants, pages 36 and 37, Volume 4.

The ACTING CHAIR: Thank you; it makes it a lot easier.

Ms HILDYARD: He has some more time now.

The ACTING CHAIR: No; it just makes it a lot easier.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not need any more time. That does not actually fit in this portfolio either. It fits under emergency services. Surf Life Saving SA fits under emergency services, so it is a question for—

Ms HILDYARD: Where did the grant we spoke about in this house come from?

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

Ms HILDYARD: We spoke at length in this house in question time about the grant you provided to Surf Life Saving SA following the storm damage incurred during the Lifesaving World Championships.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: That came from the Premier's contingency.

Ms HILDYARD: Okay. Can you guarantee that all the debt incurred, which you chose to compensate Surf Life Saving SA for, which your government chose to compensate Surf Life Saving SA for, was directly related to storm damage? Was there debt you compensated them for? Was all of that directly related to storm damage?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Again, I need a budget line and a budget paper.

Ms HILDYARD: I have already given it to you. Do I have to say it again?

The ACTING CHAIR: Why not?

Ms HILDYARD: Pages 36 and 37, Volume 4, Budget Paper 4.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I think I outlined before that that does not fit in this budget paper, so the question is not relevant to this budget line. I cannot be any clearer. It fits with the Premier. This is budgets estimates, so it is around what has been expended through this portfolio area. I pointed out that Surf Life Saving SA fits under emergency services, and I went beyond that to let you know that grant was from the Premier's grants. That fits under his—

Ms HILDYARD: You are in the Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: If I can finish—

The ACTING CHAIR: The minister is answering the question.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I am not in the Department of the Premier and Cabinet. I am talking about—

Ms HILDYARD: Your agency fits in it.

The ACTING CHAIR: Order! We are nearly done. We have nearly made it through to Friday night. The minister has the call.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I apologise if this has not been made clear to the shadow minister, but we are here answering estimates questions about the Office for Recreation and Sport and Racing and I again make clear that Surf Life Saving SA fits under—

Ms HILDYARD: We know exactly what this is about.

The ACTING CHAIR: We can keep arguing. I have been here for a few years and I have seen estimates from both sides, and I am trying to be fair. Member for Reynell, do you have another question?

Ms WORTLEY: Point of order: the Department of the Premier and Cabinet is this budget paper and it has, straight under that, sport and recreation.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: This is the Office for Recreation and Sport and Racing. That has been made very clear from the outset. I apologise if it has not been clear enough.

The ACTING CHAIR: We are running out of time if you want another question. The minister still has the call.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I just outline again that questions about Surf Life Saving SA sit with emergency services. We sat through that earlier today—some of us did not sit through it, some of us played Tetris—but this is the Office for Recreation and Sport and Racing. I even availed you of information beyond that to say that that grant was actually from the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, that it was from the Premier's grants.

Ms HILDYARD: Got it, thank you. I will find out from him.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: As far as Surf Life Saving SA is concerned, I hope you are not questioning the wonderful work the surf lifesavers do. They do an absolutely outstanding job on our beaches and I would like to take the opportunity to commend them for the great work they do and for the work they did during the tough times during that international carnival you talked about down at Glenelg. They could not have had more horrific weather or more horrific conditions.

All the volunteers—one of them sits in the chamber opposite you, and I know he was down there; I am not sure if he was in his budgie smugglers, but I know he was heavily involved in helping clean up—

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: He did compete, yes, and he was down there helping clean up. Again, I do commend all the people involved in that.

Ms HILDYARD: Thank you, minister. I refer to the same paper and the same pages. Minister, where is the internal review of peak bodies up to? What is its purpose, and can you guarantee that no jobs or funding will be lost as a result of that review? I have already referenced the budget line. Can you guarantee that no jobs and no funding will be lost as a result of the review of peak bodies?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Can you please explain where in the budget paper this is because I am not sure what you are talking about?

Ms HILDYARD: It is spoken about on page 36—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: On page 36, what line?

Ms HILDYARD: —and page 37—

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

Ms HILDYARD: —and it is also spoken about in the Budget Measures Statement. But page 36—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: In the Budget Measures Statement?

Ms HILDYARD: —and 37.

The ACTING CHAIR: Give him a line and a direct dot point.

Ms HILDYARD: Can we just get on with answering the question?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not know what you are talking about. I apologise.

Ms HILDYARD: This is absolutely extraordinary.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not know—

Ms HILDYARD: You do not know what page of your three pages—

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: Where does it mention—

Ms HILDYARD: You do not know on what page of your three pages in this document this is mentioned.

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: I do not know what you are talking about in regard to a review of peak bodies. In fact, I have spoken to the CE alongside me, and she does not know what you are talking about either on the review of peak bodies. If you can explain more, I am happy to get some more information, but I am asking all the—

Ms HILDYARD: So you do not know about a review—

The ACTING CHAIR: Order!

Ms HILDYARD: —of peak bodies?

The ACTING CHAIR: Order!

Ms HILDYARD: You do not know about a review of peak bodies?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No.

Ms HILDYARD: Okay.

The ACTING CHAIR: Order! If that is the last question, let the minister finish so that we can wind up. Thank you, minister. Do you have anything else to say on that?

The Hon. C.L. WINGARD: No, other than to answer the question and say that I was genuinely asking where it was because I do not know what you are talking about when you talk about a review of peak bodies. That is my answer.

Ms HILDYARD: Well, can you—

The ACTING CHAIR: Our time is up, I am sorry. There being no further questions, I declare the examination of the proposed payments for the Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing to be completed.

At 15:51 the committee adjourned to Monday 29 July 2019 at 13:30.