Estimates Vote

Department for Communities and Social Inclusion, $1,015,896,000

Administered Items for the Department for Communities and Social Inclusion, $190,374,000

Minister:

Hon. Z. L. Bettison, Minister for Communities and Social Inclusion, Minister for Social Housing, Minister for Multicultural Affairs, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Youth, Minister for Volunteers.

Departmental Advisers:

Ms J. Mazel, Chief Executive, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Mr P. Bull, Executive Director Youth Justice, Community Engagement and Organisational Support, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms S. Wallace, Executive Director, Policy and Community Development, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms L. Young, Executive Director, Disability and Domiciliary Care Services, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Mr N. Ashley, Acting Executive Director, Financial and Business Services, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms N. Rogers, Director, Business Affairs, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms B. Weis, Director, Community Connect, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms K. Tattersall, Director, Screening, Procurement and Improvement, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms T. Stephenson, Manager, Strategic Coordination, Business Affairs, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms J. Kennedy, Manager, Community Engagement and Grants, Policy and Community Development, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

The CHAIR: Welcome, minister, to Estimates Committee B. The estimates committees are a relatively informal procedure, and as such there is no need to stand to ask or answer questions. I believe there is an agreed timetable. Changes to committee membership will be notified as they occur. If the minister undertakes to supply information at a later date, it must be submitted by 30 October, to be tabled during the sitting week of 17 November.

I will allow the minister and the lead speaker for the opposition to make opening statements of about 10 minutes, if they wish. There will be a flexible approach to giving the call for asking questions, based on about three questions per member, alternating each side. Supplementary questions, as always, will be the exception rather than the rule. A member who is not part of the committee may ask a question at the discretion of the Chair.

Questions must be based on lines of expenditure in the budget papers, must be identifiable or referenced. There is no formal facility for the tabling of documents before the committee; however, documents can be supplied to the Chair for distribution to the committee. All questions are to be directed to the minister and not the minister's advisers, although as it is an informal atmosphere and, if the minister is happy for advisers to continue answering along a line of questions, I will allow that. All argument should be directed at the minister.

During the committee's examination, television cameras will be permitted to film from both the northern and southern galleries. Welcome, Minister for Communities and Social Inclusion. I declare the proposed payments open for examination and refer measures to portfolio statement, Volume 1. I call on the minister to make a statement if she wishes and to introduce her advises.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I will introduce my advisers: to my left is Joslene Mazel, the Chief Executive of the department; to my further left Nick Ashley, Acting Executive Director, Financial and Business Services; and, to my right, Peter Bull, Executive Director, Youth Justice, Community Engagement and Organisational Support. On our second table we have Tracey Stephenson, Manager, Strategic Coordination Business Affairs; Nancy Rogers, Director, Business Affairs; and, Sue Wallace, Executive Director, Policy and Community Development.

The CHAIR: Minister, do you have an opening statement?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes, I do. The communities and social inclusion portfolio is the cornerstone of this government's commitment to supporting vulnerable individuals and families and building strong resilient communities. The diverse programs and activities delivered in this portfolio are fundamental to ensuring all South Australians can live a decent and productive life and contribute to the government's strategic priorities of keeping South Australia an affordable place to live and building safe communities and healthy neighbourhoods.

The rising costs of living influences the quality of life for South Australians. When compared with other states, South Australia has developed a reputation as an affordable place to live and we want to keep it that way. Even with careful budgeting many households are facing difficulties making ends meet. That is why this government has various initiatives to support South Australians to better manage essential cost of living pressures.

We have acted to look after South Australian pensioners and low income earners through the introduction of the new cost of living concession, which commenced on 1 July 2015. The advantage of this concession payment, as opposed to the former council rates concession, is its flexibility. It is not restricted to a particular bill. Different households have different needs, priorities and expenses. With the new concession, households have the liberty to choose where they use it and people can assess their household budget and apply it where it is needed most.

In January this year we faced devastating bushfires in the Adelaide Hills. The Department for Communities and Social Inclusion was responsible for both emergency relief during the bushfire and leading the recovery effort after the event. The recovery effort is focused on both individual health and wellbeing and the community as a whole, and includes restoring and rebuilding the health, social, economic, built form and environmental fabric of the community. The department will continue to provide valuable direct relief and assistance to affected individuals, working with these fire-affected communities into the 2015-16 financial year.

I would also like to acknowledge the generosity and community spirit of South Australians. Individuals, businesses and corporations, their staff and customers, have donated generously. The Sampson Flat Bushfire Relief Appeal closed on 31 May 2015 and raised more than $1.9 million from 3,180 donations.

Youth justice services contribute to community safety and actively work to ensure that children and young people in the youth justice system are inspired to change and participate positively in their community. A youth justice administration bill is being developed. This will lay the foundation for a rehabilitative and community safety approach to managing young people in the youth justice system. Significant consultation with key stakeholders has occurred to help shape this work.

We must increasingly look towards smarter, innovative and more efficient ways to solve traditional and emerging issues in this sector. Over the past 12 months, multiple programs have been introduced. These include:

Thriving Communities: Achieving community-led renewal in disadvantaged South Australian communities. This is a new and innovative program that addresses disadvantage in targeted South Australian communities using a collective impact approach to build real and sustainable change.

Fund My Community is a new and exciting way we are trialling to fund community groups. This participatory budgeting initiative gives the public a say in how funds are invested across South Australia. One million dollars was made available through the program to eligible community groups to deliver projects or services to tackle disadvantage.

The Ceduna integrated services reform uses a collective impact approach to bring together community, local government and community and government organisations to address the concern for the safety and welfare of vulnerable Aboriginal people in and around Ceduna.

From 1 July 2015, there are significant new reforms being introduced by the commonwealth government in aged care. Domiciliary care is reorienting its role in response to these changes and is engaging with new and existing clients about what these changes will mean.

This year's budget is about investing in our community and creating jobs while ensuring that the more vulnerable people in our community are not left behind. We are investing in measures that build stronger and more resilient communities, where South Australia can share in our state's prosperity.

The CHAIR: Thank you, minister. Does the member for Morphett have an opening statement?

Dr McFETRIDGE: No, I do not. As there is such limited time, we will get straight into questions.

The CHAIR: Certainly.

Dr McFETRIDGE: In your opening statement, minister, you mentioned the cost of living, and I refer to Budget Paper 4 Volume 1, page 96, the total cost of services summary. I asked questions last year about the Concessions and Seniors Information System (CASIS as it is known). I have asked questions about it for a number of years now and so has the Auditor-General. Recently, the minister announced that the whole process was being dumped, after starting at $600,000 in 2008 under now Premier Jay Weatherill and then being handballed to minister Piccolo. And now you, minister, have charge of this. The total cost was $7.183 million and it has been dumped. Why has it got to this stage after so many warnings and what is going to replace it?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Thank you for your question. I think the key things we should consider here about the CASIS project is that it was ambitious and it was complex, and we note that no other jurisdiction has actually created the kind of technology solution for concessions that we sought to build in South Australia. An important feature of the CASIS project was that it sought to create a single entry point for concession recipients who would need to register their details only once. It would then automatically determine eligibility and calculate those entitlements across the concessions.

We looked at those variabilities and complexities, and when it started in 2009 that is obviously what we were looking to achieve. In order to achieve that outcome we had to work with the concession partners and the developer company to look at extensive testing and responsive development of the system. There was some slippage in deadlines and time frames, and that was to be expected, but we were assured that the current developer, the software people from ac3, would deliver. I was given that commitment as minister in this portfolio.

The project vendor ac3 has now walked away from further software development. After seeking information from the Office for Digital Government I have been advised that pursuit of the CASIS project in that form is unviable.

Dr McFETRIDGE: Do we own the software? Do we own the IT or the IP, the intellectual property? Are we getting any of this money back from ac3, who have walked away, as you said? How could they walk away?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: As a way forward, my first thing is to determine what are our legal options for ac3, because my understanding was that as a department we were going to achieve those milestones and go live. We will be seeking to not pay those invoices because we do not believe that work has been completed. We do own the intellectual property.

Dr McFETRIDGE: How much was overpaid? I think at one stage there was something like $600 million that was out there in concessions being paid to energy providers incorrectly, there were people who were eligible for concessions who did not get those concession payments. Do you have a figure that you can give the committee on where we stand at the moment? We are now rolling out this new cost of living concession—I am told that the cheques are in the mail—but what faith can this committee have that that will work, because the previous one has not?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Let me start by saying that I do not accept the figure that you proffered earlier; I never have. What we have identified—and I have spoken about this in the house—is that there were unmatched energy concession customers and people who were deemed eligible and non-eligible. We did go through a process to ask them to respond about their eligibility.

The total value of the concession overpayments calculated as at 31 March this year was $1.388 million. To put this into context, the total value of our energy concessions paid in 2014-15 was $42.8 million. What we have done is make sure that we have the concessions working, make sure that the data matching exercise was complete, and make sure that that does not happen again. We have also recovered money that is owed to us; I am informed that we have recovered $116,892 including GST from energy retailers, and we will continue to do so where they have been overpaid.

Dr McFETRIDGE: Can we be sure that the amounts you are using there are the actual amounts? There seems to be a lot of uncertainty about the whole system.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: These are the amounts to March, as I have indicated.

Dr McFETRIDGE: What is the current budget and time line for a replacement system?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We are currently undertaking a business case for a new IT system which will be called the Cost of Living Concession InformatioN (COLIN) to administer the government's new concession. One of the key things we have obviously seen in the six years that CASIS has been rolling out is a dramatic change in technology. Most specifically, what we see is that there is an increased range of commercial off-the-shelf systems and Software as a Service options that are now available on the IT market.

The department has been allocated $2.2 million over the next two years to build the COLIN system for the new concession. This is a hybrid solution, using commercial off-the-shelf systems and Software as a Service options. One of these Software-as-a-Service options is Salesforce, software that the department currently uses quite successfully in other areas.

The department will purchase these components through standard procurement processes. It is anticipated that there will be a number of vendors providing the various commercial off-the-shelf systems and Software as a Service. These components will be integrated with custom software using common industry-standard technologies. Oversight of this custom build will be with the department's IT area. This is a standard approach across government and will utilise IT systems that have a proven record.

The Office of Digital Government has advised that the transition of the CASIS project to this new IT solution was the most viable option for the department, on the basis of the new technological opportunities now available and ac3's withdrawal from further development work. Success will be ensured through the following means:

Utilisation of new, low-risk technologies that are currently available and widely used. These opportunities were not available at the time that the CASIS project was commenced.

We will be looking to the marketplace for the provision of the various components, which is likely to result in multiple contractors, rather than a reliance on one developer or firm.

Development of the system will be staged, rather than all components commencing at once. Success of each stage will determine moving on to the next stage.

Contracts for the COLIN system will be on a fixed-price basis to contain costs. Fixed-price purchasing of off-the-shelf components was not readily available when CASIS commenced.

Risk management and associated planning is a major focus for the COLIN project. A risk management committee has been established and the first major workshop has been facilitated by DCSI's Manager, Risk Management. The committee comprises senior officers from across the department.

A senior executive governance group with a representative from the Office of Digital Government will oversight the project to ensure strict adherence to the COLIN project plan and the government's IT policies. The department will seek advice from ODG about extended membership of appropriate external parties.

A thorough scoping of the COLIN system is being conducted as part of the business case. This will form the basis for the procurement process as well as the customised build.

The transition of the other concessions IT systems and data management tools to the COLIN system will be the subject of a separate business case. That business case will consider the issue of cost.

A Salesforce solution for two concessions, the Spectacles Scheme and the Personal Alert Systems Rebate Scheme, has already been the subject of a business case, and due to the flexibility of this software option, once developed, these will be easily fitted into the COLIN system.

Dr McFETRIDGE: That is all very well, minister, but what is the budget for that? We have seen cases go from $600,000 to over $7 million—12 times the cost, and this government, unfortunately, has a track record. Whether it is TRUMPS, EPAS, Oracle, ESMI, a whole range of programs were just blown out of the water. I do not want to talk about Collins submarines, which are an excellent product, an excellent machine, but I want to know whether COLIN is going to stay afloat, so to speak.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: As much as you are concerned, I am concerned, member for Morphett. As indicated, we have allocated $2.2 million over the next two years to build the COLIN system for the new concession. As we go through the business case, we will determine the cost required to implement the other aspects of the systems.

Dr McFETRIDGE: What is the budget for it?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I am not able to give you that figure at the moment, but we do have the figure, as I have given you, for the new concession.

Dr McFETRIDGE: Let us hope we are not back here next year talking about it, and that the Auditor-General is not. Let us move on to the other hot topic, so to speak. It is the same budget reference: Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, the DCSI screening checks. Can you tell the committee how many screening applicants are currently registered on the database and what percentage of those applicants require more than just a straightforward police check?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: You are asking, as of today, how many people have an application in?

Dr McFETRIDGE: Yes, how many are sitting there on your database that are needing screening checks done, and what percentage of those in the past have required a second check rather than just a straightforward police check?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Okay. Let me take each of those as we go. I am advised that there were approximately 6,998 outstanding applications at 30 June 2015. That is from something that has come in on day 1 to still with us now, and 3,985 of those are under the 30 business days.

Dr McFETRIDGE: But how many of those actually require more than just a standard police check? I heard a figure of 3 per cent at one stage, so 97 per cent just require a standard police check.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I do not think that that figure would be accurate. I will endeavour to get you an answer now. We do have the five different types of screening, as you are aware: the working with children check, the aged care check, vulnerable persons check, the general probity check and the disability check are the different ones that we have. Obviously we do not make that decision; it is the agencies that make that decision, particularly if it is within government or if it is part of a contract, about the type of screening that would happen. Are you asking how that decision is made or are you asking for the breakdown?

Dr McFETRIDGE: Really the breakdown, because I understand that a police check could be back within hours, not 30 days; more like three hours.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We are certainly endeavouring to reduce those numbers. I am going to ask Mr Peter Bull to talk to you about where we are at with that. There are different types of response. A lot of it is waiting for CrimTrac to come back now, which can be very quick or can be several days. Certainly, if you are doing a general probity check it can be very, very quick. I will ask Peter Bull to respond.

Mr BULL: The applications at the moment: within, say, 15 business days, 64.1 per cent are returned and completed in that time frame, which would indicate that they are the applications, as you are suggesting, that do not really have a lot of name matches or databases to look over, so they are very quick. A police check will only look at the criminal history, which is what we call a probity check, and they would be a very small percentage of the applications that we would do. The vast majority are working with children and disability checks, and probably the ageing checks. They would make up in the high 90 per cents.

Dr McFETRIDGE: And the systems you are using now, are they manual systems, or is there some sort of software program where you can do these checks? I would imagine that on the databases that are held now everywhere from the tax office right down to the department of motor vehicles, or whatever they call themselves now, there is plenty of crosschecking. Is it a manual system you are using?

Mr BULL: No, we are using electronic systems, apart from very old child protection information, when a manual file may need to be viewed. That is a very small number of cases where that might need to happen; otherwise they are electronic systems.

Dr McFETRIDGE: Why is it then that private providers say that they can produce most of these checks within hours rather than days? Why is it they are coming in telling me that it's the government?

Mr BULL: Those private providers are only using the criminal history information from CrimTrac. They will enter that into the system. It could be a matter of hours to a month, depending on how long CrimTrac takes to come back with that information, because they look at all police jurisdictions right across the country. So yes, and in our case we have some that are back in that time frame as well, just the same as a private provider. Anything that needs more than just criminal history information is when it takes that little bit longer to look at other databases.

Dr McFETRIDGE: So you are able to do some of these checks within hours?

Mr BULL: There would be circumstances where they would come back in that time frame from CrimTrac, yes.

Dr McFETRIDGE: Is the whole process that you are using for screening considered to be a commercial activity by the government? For example, how much is DCSI charging SAFECOM to do the CFS volunteer checks?

Mr BULL: Everybody is charged the same rates that we publish. There is a volunteer rate and there is an employer rate so there are no special exemptions with regard to the fees.

Dr McFETRIDGE: I have a real problem with one part of government paying another part of government for a service that I think could be provided basically for free, particularly when you are dealing with CFS volunteers or other volunteers having to have these checks. There is no doubt we should do those, but part of the ESL that we are paying is going to SAFECOM to pay DCSI for their screening checks which I think is a nonsense. It would be nice if you could perhaps take it on notice and let us know how much SAFECOM or the CFS and SES are paying DCSI.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Can I just add that people only require checks if that is part of the work that they do.

Dr McFETRIDGE: The CFS and SES do.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: One of the questions, obviously, has been that when you are working with children it is about what comes under the Children's Protection Act. My question would be about the CFS. Depending on what that volunteer is doing, and, of course, they are up to a variety of things, they might only require the national police check which is covered under VOAN which is the volunteer organisation and that is for free. We are happy to take it on notice to say how many CFS volunteers actually required the screening.

Dr McFETRIDGE: They all require it, 100 per cent. Perhaps those who are dealing with cadets might need a working with children check, but I would be interested in the dollar value of what DCSI is charging SAFECOM.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I will take that on notice. In relation to the time taken, let me break this down: about 78 per cent of screening applications require more than a national police check—

Dr McFETRIDGE: 78 per cent?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes, about 78 per cent, but when we break down the application finalised for all types in 2014-15: within five days 28.4 per cent were complete, in 10 days it was 24.6 per cent, in 15 days it was 11.1 per cent, in 20 days it was 7.9 per cent, and in 25 days it was 4.8 per cent. So there are a substantial number that are completed in a very short space of time. I will be very clear, and I have been very straightforward, that we did have a backlog which I concentrated on with regard to the organisation of the screening unit. I worked with the department with the identification that it was the assessment officers who required a lot more support and we have tripled the staffing of the screening unit to make sure things are as efficient as they can be.

Dr McFETRIDGE: I heard Mr Bull on radio this morning on the Leon Byner program and I think Leon Byner said he had over 600 inquiries in the last few months about people being unable to work because of the delays. Is there some way of prioritising the pre-employment checks? I know of one taxi driver who came to see me. He had just reapplied and apparently he reapplied a little bit late. It was three weeks before his current clearance expired and he was unable to work because it had not come through.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I am very concerned when people are not able to work and this has been something that I have worked on with the organisation to escalate. Let me talk about the various options that we have. If someone is unable to work, we have been talking about escalating that screening and that is one of our elements.

The other area that we have worked on is the fact of over screening. What we have seen throughout the last financial year is that there were a substantial amount of people who already had a valid screening, but it was not being recognised by their organisation. We have worked with our screening reference group and with our key users to identify portability and validity of those checks. If they have more than six months to go on their screening check, we have asked them to accept that check they have.

The other thing is to identify people to accept the check if they move between organisations. Because this is an organisation-led screening application, people often believe that with a different organisation they need a new check and that is not the case; that check is portable.

Dr McFETRIDGE: Isn't the problem, though, minister, that on the screening unit website applicants do a thorough and detailed description of the role that they are applying for, so would that not limit portability of any check if they were moving to a new role and they have had to do this thorough and detailed description? How you are overcoming that?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I think one of the key things is that you have to look at the act, the Children's Protection Act, and what that defines as working with children. That organisation will develop their risk assessment strategy and determine which positions require that screening. If someone has already been screened, we believe that that is portable and valid for three years.

Dr McFETRIDGE: Obviously, there is some work to go, but the most ludicrous case I heard recently was of a 15-year-old school student who wanted to assist in her own school who had to have a screening check. Is that something that the government is trying to get a handle on? That just seems like absolute nonsense.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I think that is a matter for the Department for Education and Child Development.

Dr McFETRIDGE: But surely you are the ones doing the screenings, so should you not be saying, 'That particular role doesn't require screening'?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: The minister responsible for that policy is the Minister for Education and Child Development.

Dr McFETRIDGE: That would obviously be adding to your backlog, so have you had some discussions with minister?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We regularly discuss with the two major departments—Health SA and Department for Education and Child Development—to make sure that we are clear about who requires a check, and that is their decision based on that act.

Dr McFETRIDGE: On identifying individuals and the 100-point check, how can you be sure that is a valid check? If somebody from interstate, say, is using their married name and they have had convictions under their maiden name, or they have changed their name, how can you be certain that is as rigid as it needs to be?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I understand that your question relates to the verification process.

Dr McFETRIDGE: I will give you an example I was given of a woman who applied for a job. There were some concerns raised about her application, and they went back and found that under her maiden name she had actually been in gaol for 14 months; they had not twigged that there was an issue there. She could have gone through and—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Well, let's be very clear that when you are filling out a form it is similar to a statutory declaration. This is a very similar process to when you are doing a statutory declaration, and I am sure that people would come to your electorate office, if someone there is a Justice of the Peace, for them to sign that form. People are required to answer truthfully in that application; it is just as important as if you are applying for a passport.

We ask people for their previous names. Obviously, we go through a process where, if there are name matches, we identify what that information is and we also go through a period of natural justice, to talk with those people directly about the situation. I am going to ask Mr Bull whether he would like to add anything further.

Mr BULL: Thank you minister. One of the issues is the pseudonyms, where people may be known by other names; sometimes they do not declare those on their forms. We often find those with name matches, with birth dates, addresses, etc., that relate to an individual, so we can establish that we are talking about the same individual. As the minister said, we do engage with those applicants to then elicit that further information, but in our experience people who are trying to, I suppose, avoid the system are very few indeed.

Dr McFETRIDGE: The need to make sure that everybody is who they say they are is obviously vital. I still am concerned if we are leaving it down to people to fill out all the forms without actually sighting the original documents. I am not saying that they need to come to the department.

One company is suggesting that pharmacists do it and sign off as they do with other documents. In fact, hundreds of people come in to my office wanting documents witnessed and copies of documents. I am sure MPs would be more than happy to help improve the flow through the system by having identity checks done more quickly.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Perhaps I could touch on the online system which went live this morning. We think that this supports that concern you have and follows through what we see in other areas where they are looking at this verification process. The online application will work as follows: the requesting organisation will send an email to the employer or volunteer requesting that they complete the application, and the applicant will then need to register by creating a user name and password and verifying their identity before completing the application and submitting it to the screening unit.

Applicants will be able to verify their identification in three ways: by using their passport or birth certificate and driver's licence through the Document Verification Service; by presenting their identification to the requesting organisation, who will then physically sight and verify the documents; or by completing a physical form and verifying their identification with a verifying officer, exactly as they do now. Just like other online services, online applications will not be signed, as they are completed in a secure environment through an individual secure user identification and initiated by a requesting organisation.

Instead, each applicant is required to accept a declaration statement before submitting the application form to secure the approval of submission of the application. The DCSI Screening Unit will use the Document Verification Service to verify identity documents online as part of the new online application form.

Dr McFETRIDGE: On the same reference, my understanding is that the DCSI Screening Unit has been making contact with prospective employers about issues, including cancellation. Is the unit contacting both the employees and the employers, and how does that work with privacy and those sorts of issues?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Sorry, can you clarify your question? Are you saying if it requires to be removed, the—

Dr McFETRIDGE: Yes, I understand that the unit has been making contact with prospective employees and employers when issues arise, including cancellations. How are you handling privacy issues with employees and employers? Is there an issue or not? If there is not an issue, that is good.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: The application forms give us the consent.

Dr McFETRIDGE: The DCSI College for Learning and Development—I think it is called the Stanton Institute now—promotes that students undertaking the Certificate III in Disability Studies will receive their parchment and a full DCSI screening at the completion of the eight weeks of study. How does the department guarantee that is going to happen? Is there preferential treatment for these applicants?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: You talk to me about how we work with other groups to reduce the levels of overscreening. One of the areas we also identified was those groups, such as students who are nursing students or education students, who then go on to do work placement through the year. One of the ways we are working with the universities is to make sure that they complete the screening in the January or as they start the first year of that course, and that will then obviously be valid for three years.

This is a similar thing that we would be doing with the Stanton Institute. I do not necessarily think that they would get any priority at all because, obviously, as we become more efficient—and I am advised that since 1 June, 95 per cent of applications have been completed within 30 business days—that would fit in with the time line.

I think it is very important that, if people are looking to do training in particular areas that require a screening, they get that screening completed, particularly if the opportunity is there for them to get it completed as they start the course or before they start the course to make sure that there are no issues with them working in that field.

Dr McFETRIDGE: On the same topic, the NGOs who are involved in providing disability services have expressed concerns to me about the government being a service provider and also the provider of screening services in a competitive environment. Are there any issues there about competitive neutrality and the need to make sure everybody is on an equal basis?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I am advised that there are no issues of competitive neutrality. Member for Morphett, you have raised with me previously about other people who believe they may be able to do the system more quickly, some private companies, perhaps. My door is always open to talk to people about what they offer. My experience thus far has been that they do not tend to understand the details of our system, and I am happy to meet with them and talk about that aspect.

Obviously one of the challenges we have is that we have lots of different databases that are not interoperable, so they require different ways of logging in and checking the system. We even have to look at DECD information that is on microfiche if we have to look back. There are always ways that I am going to look for more efficient use of the officers' time in the screening unit. One of the key things to remember is that, when these systems were developed and the databases, it was not with a view that they would be used in this screening unit process.

Dr McFETRIDGE: So the government is then open to private providers coming in and actually participating in providing these services in competition with the government?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I think the national police check is something they can do, and they can continue to do that work.

Dr McFETRIDGE: But accessing other databases, at this stage the government has a monopoly on them?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I would have serious concerns about them having access to that information. I am always interested in the systems they use and how it could be more efficient.

Dr McFETRIDGE: But if these other providers are recognised interstate and nationally, as some of them are that I have spoken to, surely they would have the credibility to have access to what are now other exclusive databases.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I would be very concerned, given the detailed information retained within those databases, that I would not be in a position at this point for access to be there, but that also would be a question for other ministers responsible in this area as it is their database.

Dr McFETRIDGE: With the NDIS coming into South Australia there will be a massive number of potential employees. Are you confident that those employees will be able to go through the system as quickly as we would like them to, so they will not been restricted in getting their job applications processed?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes.

Dr McFETRIDGE: With the cost of screening, is there any way the government is looking at reducing the cost of screening with unemployment at 8.2 per cent in South Australia? Getting people into jobs now is so important. I am talking to some of the NGOs, and they are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for getting their employees screened every year, and it is a significant impost on their business.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: The screening unit was set up on a cost-recovery basis. In order to ameliorate that cost, volunteers are charged a lower amount and they can have multiple screens on that in the same application. So, we kept that cost down. The key issue (and you made reference to it) is for people to accept the portability and validity of the screen for three years. That would be a cost distributed over three years.

Dr McFETRIDGE: Is the government looking at a system like the blue card or the ochre card system, so there is complete portability and checking? It is accepted interstate and seems to be working well.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We have a green letter that has a particular aspect to it so that it cannot be replicated easily, and we think it is equal to a blue card. There is an across government screening process being conducted by the Attorney-General, and at all times, as I have already indicated, we are open to reviewing this system and looking at it.

If I recall, member for Morphett, last year we talked about a potential national screening process that you were particularly interested in. At the moment each state has an individual system and different requirements on how they screen.

Dr McFETRIDGE: Just on the same reference, the screening unit publishes statistics relevant to the administrative process of the screening but not statistics relevant to the outcomes or the success of the current policy. Is there any particular reason for that, or is that something that the government is looking at doing?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I am sorry, I need you to break down the question. Are you talking about published statistics?

Dr McFETRIDGE: Yes, relevant to the administration of the process and how many applicants you have. Are you publishing statistics relevant to the outcomes and the success of the current policy, regarding how quickly people are able to go through the system and have their screening undertaken in comparison to other states and jurisdictions?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: The time of the system to do the application?

Dr McFETRIDGE: Yes. How do we perform relative to other states and jurisdictions?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I do not have that detail in front of me. I think the key aspect here is that each state has a different system. Sometimes it is very difficult because you are not measuring apples with apples. Our system is quite different. We do not wait for a trigger to look at child protection databases and care concerns information. Other jurisdictions would wait for some kind of trigger to look into that information. Therefore, I would put it that our system is already more robust in that respect. But as you and I have talked about, I think we could work towards some national principles about child screening, because people do not stay in one state, they do move from state to state. I think that would be something that we could look towards, and I will continue to talk to the Attorney-General about us progressing that.

The CHAIR: Thank you, minister. According to the agreed timetable, I now declare that the examination of the Minister for Communities and Social Inclusion is completed. Thank you to your advisers. I call on the minister to change advisers, if she needs to. We are now moving to Housing SA.

Membership:

Mr Bell substituted for Dr McFetridge.

Mr Williams substituted for Mr Gardner.

Departmental Advisers:

Ms J. Mazel, Chief Executive, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Mr P. Fagan-Schmidt, Executive Director, Housing SA, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Mr N. Ashley, Acting Executive Director, Financial and Business Services, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms N. Rogers, Director, Business Affairs, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms R. Hulm, Director, Corporate Services, Renewal SA.

Ms T. Stephenson, Manager, Strategic Coordination Business Affairs, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

The CHAIR: Welcome back, minister. You are now here as the Minister for Social Housing. I invite you to make a statement and introduce your new advisers.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Thank you. To my right is Mr Philip Fagan-Schmidt, the Executive Director of Housing SA. To my left is Joslene Mazel, the chief executive. To my far left is Nick Ashley, the Acting Executive Director, Financial and Business Services. Behind me to my left on the second table is Tracey Stephenson, Manager of Strategic Coordination, Business Affairs. In the middle is Nancy Rogers, Director of Business Affairs, and to my right on the second table is Rosa Hulm, Director of Corporate Services.

The CHAIR: Minister, do you have an opening statement?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes, I do. Access to safe, stable housing is essential to health, wellbeing, participation and productivity. Housing SA delivers a range of vital, affordable housing services, including managing social housing properties, private rental assistance, specialised housing programs, support to the community housing sector, and services for people who are homeless or fleeing family violence.

I became concerned last year to learn that the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness (NPAH) was extended to only 30 June 2015. The South Australian government has invested considerably in the reform of our state's homelessness sector, and the loss of commonwealth funding would have a significant impact on the sector's ability to help those most vulnerable in our community. The Department for Communities and Social Inclusion has worked tirelessly with the specialist homelessness sector to advocate to the commonwealth government to extend the NPAH funding, and I would like to extend a special thank you to this sector. It worked very closely with us in a series of roundtables about the options going forward, as we were very concerned that the NPAH agreement was not going ahead.

However, I am pleased to say that in March this year we secured commonwealth funding of $8.87 million per annum for the next two years. The state government has matched this funding, providing $35.48 million for the homelessness sector to the end of June 2017.

During this year we have worked collaboratively with many partners to achieve better housing outcomes for the people of South Australia. An example of what has been delivered is the affordable housing project Common Ground Mellor Street, which was completed in November 2014. This important Adelaide CBD development provides an additional 52 apartments for people who are currently homeless or at risk, continuing our commitment to make a real impact on homelessness in South Australia.

In December 2014 the state and commonwealth governments agreed upon South Australia's 2014-2016 National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing (NPARIH) bilateral implementation plan. Housing SA will receive over $26 million over the next two years to build 15 new houses and refurbish 34 existing properties on the APY lands. This funding also reimburses Housing SA for costs associated with the overachievement of dwelling construction and refurbishment targets in previous years. The plan also provides for the expansion of South Australia's Employment Related Accommodation program. This program provides affordable housing in locations that offer a greater range of employment and educational opportunities for remote Aboriginal residents, something that is often a barrier for Aboriginal people.

This government has a bold vision to rebuild and renew the suburbs once built by the great South Australian Housing Trust. To support this, in January 2015 the government implemented changes to the governance of the SA Housing Trust to further focus Renewal SA as the state government's primary urban renewal authority. As a consequence, Housing SA is strengthening its role as the provider of customer and tenant services to vulnerable people in the community.

Housing SA manages around 43,000 South Australian Housing Trust properties, enabling thousands of our citizens to access stable, safe and affordable housing. As landlord, Housing SA takes a proactive approach, putting customer fairness, individual and community wellbeing and sound financial management at the forefront.

Over the past year Housing SA has been transforming its business to better meet the needs of its customers and the community, with a new service delivery model designed to improve its capacity to proactively and appropriately respond to the increasing risk and vulnerability of its tenants. The new approach is being progressively implemented across the state, and results today are very promising.

Housing SA has organised its resources around a people-centric service, engaging government and non-government agencies to provide their expertise and diverse views. Redesigned customer support roles have been implemented with new tools and work processes focusing on customer risk and vulnerability. The new model enables proactive identification of at-risk tenancies and also tenants including, importantly, where there may be children at risk due to child protection concerns. This service delivery approach aims not only to deliver immediate results but to build a foundation for longer term change for our customers and the community.

In January of this year, South Australia saw one of its worst natural disasters since Ash Wednesday, when the Sampson Flat bushfire caused huge loss of property but, thankfully, no loss of life. More than 4,000 people sought assistance from the government, with almost 13,000 hectares of land and 24 homes destroyed, along with many more damaged. Housing SA swung into action and assisted those people needing help with accommodation, grants and advice. Their willingness to respond quickly to help those people who were in need of assistance was heartwarming and very much appreciated.

I would like to make a special note of Housing SA staff. After having a meeting with the police commissioner, the Premier and the CFS to understand what was happening on that day, I went out to the relief centre in Golden Grove, which was set up and running from 5am. There were 800 people there and the Housing SA staff were there for, I think, more than two weeks and did a terrific job, helping people at a time when they were incredibly stressed.

Stable, safe housing is essential for people to be able to engage and participate, and Housing SA will therefore be playing a key role in supporting the Thriving Communities initiatives which we are looking at throughout the department. This government continues to demonstrate its commitment to keeping South Australia affordable, delivering new affordable housing initiatives and supporting and protecting our most vulnerable in the community.

The CHAIR: Does the member for Adelaide have an opening statement?

Ms SANDERSON: No.

The CHAIR: Would you like to ask some questions?

Ms SANDERSON: Yes. Referring to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 115: Program summary, can the minister provide a total and detailed breakdown of the net debt position of the Housing SA client debt as of 30 June 2015?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I do not have that detail to 30 June 2015, but I have it as at 31 May. The total outstanding debt is $25.3 million. The number of tenants with a debt is 7,366 and we have debt of non-tenants as well, which is at about the same level—7,974. The percentage of total tenant debt on arrangement is 79.7 per cent and the percentage of total non-tenant debt on arrangement is 84.1 per cent.

Ms SANDERSON: How much debt was written off for the 2014-15 year?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We will take that on notice.

Ms SANDERSON: What about the amount that was reinstated for 2014-15, as well?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: What do you mean by 'reinstated', member for Adelaide?

Ms SANDERSON: That is a very good question. I was going to ask the minister to explain the 'reinstatable debt' and what accounting principle that follows, because it has been used continually and I have never come across it in my accounting experience.

Membership:

Ms Digance substituted for Hon. T.R. Kenyon.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: In order to provide you with accurate information about that accounting treatment, we will take that on notice.

Ms SANDERSON: Given that the amount of Housing SA client debt is continually increasing year on year, what is the minister doing to rectify this situation and get this debt under control?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Let us just go back to my original answer, that the total outstanding debt on arrangement, if we look at tenant and non-tenant debt, is 81.6 per cent. The debt might apply to someone who owes a small amount of money or a large amount of money. Maybe someone has had a bill come in, an electricity or a water bill, that they could not pay. I think one of the key things to understand is traditionally we have people who are very vulnerable. More than 80 per cent of people in Housing SA properties are on a fixed income. I just want to put us into the picture when we talk about this debt and where it is at. I think what we are doing is very sensible and very rational. When people have a debt, we expect them to pay it, and we expect them to have a repayment plan, which we see with approximately 80 per cent.

Obviously, one of the areas that we think that we can improve on and where the new service delivery model will support us, is that as soon as people do have a debt we have contact with them. One of the key things we have is the majority of people, as I understand it, elect to have their rent deducted from their Centrelink payment. They can opt out from that deduction and to me that is a very clear trigger that we need to go and have a conversation with that tenant. That is what we will do when we roll out the new service delivery model; that is one of the tools that we will look at when someone who perhaps has not had any debt at all starts to accrue debt, that we will go and see them straightaway.

Ms SANDERSON: With respect, minister, your government has been in government for 13 years and this is increasing year upon year. To now say that the only initiative that you have to get this debt down is that you will ring people when you notice that their direct debit is not going through; I cannot believe that that has not been done for the last 13 years. Given that their rent is capped at 25 per cent of their income, being vulnerable or not vulnerable is no excuse for not being able to pay your rent.

The CHAIR: Member for Adelaide, this is not a forum for impromptu speeches. Do you have a question at the end of that?

Ms SANDERSON: It is clearly a management issue; are there any other initiatives?

The CHAIR: That may be the case, but this is not the forum for impromptu speeches.

Ms SANDERSON: The question is, what other initiatives is the minister taking to reduce that debt level and recover the money?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We have arrangements with 82 per cent of people and they have agreed to arrange to pay the debt. I am satisfied that that is a positive way forward, but of course we continue to do the best and to look at the world's best practice national standards on doing that. We will do a review on the current debt management practices and policies in this financial year, to look at the best practice in debt management and to ensure that the most effective mechanisms are in place to ensure the best possible outcomes for the customer, the agency and the government.

Ms SANDERSON: My next question refers to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 115, under the description Waiting Lists. What is the total number of people who were housed and those who are on the Housing SA waiting list for the 2014-15 year and the breakdown for each category in those years, and how many were under the age of 25?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: As at 31 May this year, this relates to the number of customers on the register: category 1, 3,368; category 2, 5,837; category 3, 11,904; low demand, 32; pending, 49; for a total of 21,190. The number of customers allocated over the past five years, once again as at 31 May 2015 for the 2014-15 year: category 1, 2,087 were allocated; in category 2, 245; and in category 3, 151; and the total number of customers allocated up to 31 May 2015 was 2,484.

You asked specifically regarding customers aged under 25 years. Once again, as at 31 May 2015: those on the Housing SA register, 2,964; and those that were allocated to public housing during 2014-15, 451.

Ms SANDERSON: Do you have the breakdown of the categories at all?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: For those aged under 25?

Ms SANDERSON: Yes.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I do not have that. We can take that on notice.

Ms SANDERSON: Great, thank you.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Can I just go forward though. You were talking about allocations. I would like to focus on category 1 and the length of time in category 1. We went through where we are at. For 2014-15 as at May 2015 those that are allocated in less than six months are 65 per cent of those people on category 1, and that is something that I wanted to put on the record.

Ms SANDERSON: My next question is also page 115, rent and occupancy reviews. Can the minister please advise the following: the total number of houses that Housing SA or the Housing Trust owns, the number of those that are tenantable, and the number of those that are waiting for sale or development and those that are empty due to waiting on repairs and maintenance?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Thank you, member for Adelaide. As you know, there were changes in January of this year and I will endeavour to go through very clearly how that is broken down now. Once again, this is at 31 May 2015. Rental stock that is occupied is 41,074. The rental stock that is vacant and tenantable is 671. Rental stock that is vacant and untenantable that requires major maintenance is 194. What is specifically Housing SA responsibility is 41,939 houses. Rental stock vacant and untenantable for sales and acquisitions is 319. Capital projects is 243. Renewal SA has responsibility for those 562 houses. Rental stock vacant, untenantable and under consideration is 443, and that is a shared responsibility between Renewal SA and Housing SA. That takes us to the total stock of 42,944.

Ms SANDERSON: Other than the 1,100 properties that were transferred earlier this year, how many other Housing SA properties have been transferred to community housing groups?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: That is a question for minister Rau, the Minister for Housing and Urban Development.

Ms SANDERSON: Of the houses that are empty and untenantable due to waiting on repairs and maintenance—I think you said 194—what would be the estimated cost of those repairs and maintenance and the waiting time before they are ready?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: While I get some of those answers for you, I will say that one of the key things that I am working on with Housing SA is the re-tenanting of our properties, and we have had a key project on that in relation to decreasing the time that it takes to re-tenant a property. I look forward to coming back to you in the next few months about our, I guess, truncated time process for that rental stock that is vacant and tenantable. While we believe we are very much in line with other jurisdictions and the private rental market, it is an area of interest of mine and I will continue to look at that.

We have a benchmark performance of five weeks for those tenantable dwellings, including any vacancy maintenance work. I do not believe I have a breakdown in regard to time for major maintenance or the costs. Vacancy maintenance is $35 million for the 2015-16 allocated budget, but I do not have the breakdown looking at those that require major maintenance at this stage.

Ms SANDERSON: Has Housing SA undertaken the rent and occupancy review that was due in August 2014 and, if so, what were the outcomes of those reviews as far as unapproved household members and extra household income?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I will ask Mr Fagan-Schmidt to speak.

Mr FAGAN-SCHMIDT: I do not have the data on the specific outcomes but, yes, we undertake occupancy reviews as part of our ordinary business, but I do not have the data on that particular one.

Ms SANDERSON: Are you able to bring that back to the house?

Mr FAGAN-SCHMIDT: Sure.

Ms SANDERSON: Yes, I believe there was an amnesty in 2013 so you did not do your standard review, and then you went back to your standard reviews in August 2014.

Mr FAGAN-SCHMIDT: Yes, that is right. We have it as a periodic part of our business, yes.

Ms SANDERSON: You may have just answered this, but I think you gave a budget, minister, of $35 million per annum of repairs and maintenance. Can you verify if that was the figure for both the 2013-14 and the 2014-15 year; and how much of that figure would relate to evicted tenants, for the cost of repairs and maintenance?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Let's talk about maintenance for this year, and I will break it down because we have different aspects of it. The total 2015-16 allocated budget is $123.6 million for maintenance. The first is responsive maintenance at $43 million; that is the allocated budget and that responds reactively to health, safety and security issues and includes horticultural work and addresses urgent building maintenance and repair requests.

Program maintenance for this financial year is $27.3 million, and program maintenance proactively maintains the condition, amenity, environmental sustainability, quality and serviceability of the properties. That includes things like painting, minor modifications for tenants with a disability, maintaining common garden area maintenance in group housing sites, and fire safety management. Vacancy maintenance is $35 million of this 2015-16 allocated budget, and that looks at returning the condition of vacant houses to accommodation standards for reletting or preparation for sale.

We also have $14.2 million for capital maintenance. Capital maintenance improves the overall condition, amenity, quality and serviceability of dwellings which have been identified for longer term retention. Capital maintenance includes items of significant expenditure, such as kitchen and wet area upgrades, internal and/or external upgrades of group sites, and major modifications for tenants with a disability. We also allocate money for double unit separations, $2 million, and other, including Aboriginal communities, community housing and office maintenance of $2.1 million. That takes us to $123.6 million.

Ms SANDERSON: Minister, of the $35 million you mentioned, which was vacancy management, how much of that is recovered from bonds that tenants are normally required to pay in commercial properties?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I will ask Mr Fagan-Schmidt to answer that.

Mr FAGAN-SCHMIDT: The vacancy management is doing things with the convenience of people not being in the home to bring it back to a vacancy standard or to prepare it for sale. Unless the damage were done as a result of unfair wear and tear, there would not be automatically an on-charge to the tenant.

If in the course of either a home visit, or an inspection in the context of a property becoming vacant, it was identified that some of those costs were to be passed on to the tenant through non-fair wear and tear, an order would be raised; in fact, we communicate first with the tenant about having with it repaired and then an order would be raised for the work to be done, and that invoice would be passed on. If there were a bond lodged by that tenant, obviously that is a form of security. But, in any event, we would pursue the tenant if they were moving out of public housing for the debt.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: You talked about damage to properties.

Ms SANDERSON: Yes.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Housing SA manages over 40,000 properties, and therefore—and I have made this very clear publicly—the vast majority of our tenants do absolutely the right thing. They take great pride in their homes, and also they know that having the set rent at 25 per cent is very beneficial to their sustainability in going forward. There is, however, damage to properties by tenants, and this factor is incorporated in that overall maintenance program. It is a fairly small proportion of overall cost of maintenance, estimated at 6.8 per cent of the overall responsive and vacancy maintenance budget of $77.52 million in 2014-15.

Ms SANDERSON: What would that figure be? You are saying it is 6.8 per cent of—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Damage, as you have raised before, we allocate to both part of responsive and also the vacancy budget aspects.

Ms SANDERSON: That is $78 million, so 6.8 per cent of that. That is a lot of money.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: This financial year that is $78 million; I am referencing the financial year previously of 2014-15, so we estimate at 6.8 per cent of that budget, which was $77.52 million, so there is a slight increase.

Ms SANDERSON: How much of that is then recovered? Given that is actual damage caused by tenants, how much of that is recovered and what are you doing about improving that recovery rate?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It is my understanding that the majority of that is recovered. We will take some time to have a look at that aspect. One of the key things—and I think this has been raised before—is people understanding what their responsibilities are as tenants. While we do have many ongoing tenant leases, people who come into Housing SA properties do go on to a probationary lease; this might be one year or two years. We make it very clear to them what their responsibilities are during that time. That is one of the ways that we are supporting to make sure people are aware of what is required to maintain their home. If that is not maintained, then people are evicted.

Ms SANDERSON: Just to be clear on those figures, the figures that you gave me, in relation to responsive maintenance and program maintenance, were to do with the 2014-15 year, or was that the 2013-14 year?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Obviously, we do not have the final figure for the 2014-15 year.

Ms SANDERSON: And the 6.8 per cent, as long as that is from the same year I can actually get a figure.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It is for damage, and that is non-fair wear and tear, and it is estimated at 6.8 per cent of the overall responsive and vacancy maintenance budget of $77.52 million for 2014-15.

Ms SANDERSON: Is it possible to find out how much of that 6.8 per cent related to tenants who were evicted? These are obviously troublesome tenants you have forcibly removed or evicted.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I do not know if we have that specific percentage. Perhaps Mr Phil Fagan-Schmidt can speak of his experience in this respect.

Mr FAGAN-SCHMIDT: I think to do that we would have to correlate evictions with individual property files. Probably the other thing to say is that, because we do not have powers of eviction, quite often what occurs is that as many people as we move with eviction will, in fact, terminate their own tenancy as those who are formally evicted. I think it would be a matter of putting those files together with the property cases.

I think the important point to make is that when a debt is raised, whether the tenant remains in the property or moves elsewhere or moves as a result of our actions to evict or is ultimately evicted, all those are treated the same in terms of the way that we follow up on the debt with them.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I know that this is an area of interest to you, so perhaps I can run through the evictions we have had for 2014-15 as at 31 May: 35 are related to debt, but then we have 55 evictions related to other areas, including:

abandoned properties;

access;

expiry of lease;

illegal activity;

unapproved alterations;

non-residing;

property condition;

property ownership;

section 87, which is a serious breach;

section 90, which is disruption; and

tenant versus tenant.

So, that is 90 evictions as at 31 May 2015. We have seen a decrease in the evictions because we believe that our new service model has early intervention as a key part, and that means that, as soon as we identify that there is an issue, we provide that case management support. We do not want people getting themselves into debt when what they need is extra support services.

Ms SANDERSON: Can the minister advise the amount and type of crisis accommodation available, and any plans to expand it?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Crisis accommodation relating to the homelessness sector?

Ms SANDERSON: Yes, and in particular for women and families, what crisis care is available?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: As you are fully aware, we had the gateway system, which enables people to contact in the different areas. We have a separate gateway for youth and for domestic violence. The specialist homelessness sector in South Australia is comprised of 40 non-government and government organisations, providing 75 programs over 97 outlets. They include specialist services for women and children escaping domestic violence. These services are funded through the NPAH, which I talked about in my opening address, and the NAHA.

We know that it is quite critical to respond to people in crisis, providing early intervention and emergency accommodation. While we are talking about the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness (NPAH), I would like to put on record my incredible disappointment at part of the commonwealth. While I was incredibly pleased that they agreed to the next two years, it did not include indexation—so no provision for CPI—nor did it include equal remuneration order wage increases, which have been mandated by the Fair Work Commission.

We wrote to minister Morrison to identify this and say, 'Thank you very much, we are pleased to match your NPAH, but there was a shortfall around $740,000 in 2015-16 rising to $1.46 million in 2016-17.' There is also no funding for capital projects that we have had previously. This state government has committed to indexation and to the government's share of ERO, and I just want to put that on the record.

Ms SANDERSON: For the crisis care available for women and families, can the minister advise at what capacity rates they were or how many families were helped?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: The Central Domestic Violence Service, as an example, has 11 crisis and 19 transitional accommodation opportunities for victims of domestic and family violence which, while not located in the CBD, are available in the eastern metropolitan area for women and their children escaping violence.

Ms SANDERSON: Have they been at capacity, are there plans to expand, are there waiting lists or how is that going?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I do not have that detail; we will endeavour to get an answer for you. There is no doubt at all that we have had an increase in our homelessness services. One of the key aspects from the youth aspect, which is part of the strategy for youth, is identifying the triggers and preventing youth homelessness. Over the last few years we have seen an incredible increase in identification about what is homelessness.

What I mean by that is that, traditionally, people think that someone who is homeless is an older man with a drug or alcohol issue. Yet, what we actually see often with homelessness is women and children escaping domestic violence, and often young people who are couch surfing. Going back five years, that cohort was not always well identified, and we have seen that change and we continue to offer those services to support women.

We know that we have had an increase in the CBD with Common Ground. From a youth perspective we have had the Uno apartments and The Ladder Project. It is a key aspect of the youth strategy that I announced in February this year. The Service to Youth Council, along with a key working group, is looking at best practice throughout South Australia, Australia and the world with regard to preventing youth homelessness.

Ms SANDERSON: Can the minister please break down the type of leasing contract and the number of Housing SA tenants as at 31 May 2015? Last year that was broken down for me in short-term lease, direct lease, probationary, fixed term and ongoing.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: In order to identify that, we are going to have to take that on notice. If I recall from my many briefings, about 80 per cent have an ongoing lease.

Ms SANDERSON: Last year, the figure for short-term lease and direct lease, which was three to six and 18 to 24, was near 600 out of the 43,000 houses at the time. I assume they will be fairly similar percentages. On that basis, given how many people are on permanent contracts, how will the government achieve its stated policy of redeveloping 4,500 houses within 10 kilometres of the city by 2020? When people are on a fixed lease, it is a lot more difficult to redevelop their home and move them.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We will be working very closely with Renewal SA on the relocation program. Just because people have an ongoing lease does not mean that they cannot then be offered a different property. I do not think that that will be the issue. I am interested, however, in regard to short-term leases, if we have identified that a property is going to be utilised for part of the Renewing our Streets and Suburbs project, there still might be the opportunity for short-term leases until that property is required.

Ms SANDERSON: The very historic leases that I have read require the tenant to be rehoused in a house 'no smaller than' and 'in the same suburb as' and 'must be no lesser than the home they have', which makes it quite difficult if you are trying to redevelop and put two houses onto one block. First, how will you resolve that? Secondly, has that been removed from the new fixed leasing contracts that you are engaging in?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: No, it has not been removed. We will have a dedicated tenant relationship and transition unit. That is being established within Renewal SA to manage the relocations of tenants. We will have relocations officers who will assist by communicating and liaising directly with tenants regarding their relocation. When we have relocated people, I think the key aspect has been people. It is about talking to the person about their needs. While there are definitions within our policies about how we will do that, I think the key aspect is looking at what that person needs. One of the key areas is an increasing ageing tenant population. One of the key things is that, if they are to be provided with a new property, it should have universal access. As they age, whether they are ageing or whether they have disability needs, the newer houses will provide that much better.

Ms SANDERSON: I have another quick question, if I might. I am right near the end. What mechanism exists for contractors completing repairs and maintenance on behalf of Housing SA to report where a child's living environment is squalid, unhygienic or unsanitary? This is in the example of the 'house of horrors'. I have heard from other contractors that they are aware of many houses like this, yet they are not mandatory reporters, and maybe they should not be. But what mechanism is there for them to pass that on to Housing SA?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: My understanding is that we have made it very clear to those contractors that they are to report to us any concerns they have. They are not mandatory reporters, but obviously any evidence of squalor, any evidence of children not being looked after, we would expect that they would report that to Housing SA immediately.

Ms SANDERSON: Is that in their contract? Is it in writing? Do they know to do that?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: My understanding is that it is made very clear in our operational discussions with our contractors who deliver those multitrade contracts that that is a key aspect that we expect them to do.

The CHAIR: Thank you, minister. According to the agreed timetable, I declare the examination of the Minister for Social Housing completed. I thank the minister and her advisers. The committee stands suspended until 11.45.

Sitting suspended from 11:29 to 11:45.

Membership:

Mr Pisoni substituted for Ms Sanderson.

Mr Duluk substituted for Mr Bell.

Mr Tarzia substituted for Mr Williams.

Minister:

Hon. Z. L. Bettison, Minister for Communities and Social Inclusion, Minister for Social Housing, Minister for Multicultural Affairs, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Youth, Minister for Volunteers.

Departmental Advisers:

Ms J. Mazel, Chief Executive, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms S. Wallace, Executive Director, Policy and Community Development, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Mr N. Ashley, Acting Executive Director, Financial and Business Services, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms N. Rogers, Director, Business Affairs, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Mr G. Myers, Principal Coordinator, Strategic Projects, Business Affairs, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Mr P. Bull, Executive Director, Youth Justice, Community Engagement and Organisational Support, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

Ms J. Kennedy, Manager, Community Engagement and Grants, Policy and Community Development, Department for Communities and Social Inclusion.

The CHAIR: I welcome the minister in her role as the Minister for Multicultural Affairs, as well as her advisers, and I ask her to make a statement, if she wishes, and to introduce those advisers to us.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: To my left is the Chief Executive of the Department for Communities and Social Inclusion Joslene Mazel, and to my far left is Nick Ashley, the Acting Executive Director, Financial and Business Services. To my right is Sue Wallace, Executive Director, Policy and Community Development. On the second table we have, to the left, Greg Myers, Principal Coordinator, Strategic Projects, Business Affairs, and to the right Nancy Rogers, Director, Business Affairs. In the third row is Peter Bull, Executive Director, Youth Justice, Community Engagement and Organisational Support, and to the right Justine Kennedy, Manager, Community Engagement and Grants, Policy and Community Development.

Here in South Australia we can pride ourselves on a successful living model of cultural and linguistic diversity in action, where people from a wide range of cultures, language groups and religions live together with mutual respect and in relative harmony. We have a long history of diversity, and we have seen several waves of migration.

If we flash forward to today, we are seeing an unprecedented diversity in our migration. In 2014 alone nearly 9,000 people arrived to call South Australia their home. It really is a privilege to be the Minister for Multicultural Affairs, and I note that the member for Unley as well as the opposition parliamentary secretary for multicultural affairs are very active participants in supporting our multicultural community to celebrate and commemorate their cultures.

We know that people have moved here to reunite with family, others in search of job opportunities, meeting the needs of our labour market and skills shortages in South Australia. Others have made the bold move to flee war and persecution in search of refuge or safety.

Multicultural SA has an important role to play in supporting and promoting an open, inclusive, cohesive and equitable society. One of the ways we do this is by administering the Multicultural Grants Program. Multicultural grants are available to community groups to assist them to promote and maintain their culture. The Multicultural Grants Program has grown from $75,000 in 2002 to $1 million in 2014, significantly reflecting this government's commitment to our diverse and peaceful communities.

I am delighted that this program is expanding again. Over the next four years we will offer an additional $8 million of funding to support multicultural communities and community harmony in South Australia. This substantial increase in investment is a practical indication of this government's commitment to multicultural communities.

Funding will support communities to modernise their facilities, including better access to venues for an ageing population, and expand a number of festivals to appeal to a wider audience. Further, the funding will support the establishment of the Stronger Families, Stronger Communities program that will fund community development projects covering areas such as family and relationship support, domestic violence and racial discrimination.

As highlighted in the Governor's speech to parliament outlining the government's agenda for South Australia, it is time to move to the next step of our great multicultural project, by moving beyond the acceptance of cultural and religious diversity to promote understanding. In 2015-16, Multicultural SA will be leading the development of new policy directions for the South Australian government to reflect significant changes in the diversity of our population and contemporary concepts in multiculturalism. This includes building on the outcomes of the InterculturAdelaide summit, which was held recently in Adelaide, as a basis for developing new policy directions.

I am also pleased that Multicultural SA will hold its second Multicultural Festival on 1 November 2015. After the success of the inaugural festival in 2013, we will once again fill Rundle Mall with colour, excitement, music, culture and tradition at this one-day festival to celebrate our state's diversity. In collaboration with Adelaide City Council, we will invite over 50 new and established communities to share cultural performances, market stalls and activity workshops with all South Australians.

As you can see, being the Minister for Multicultural Affairs is something I enjoy. We live in a culturally rich state and I thoroughly believe in supporting our culturally diverse communities to continue to enrich the lives of all South Australians.

The CHAIR: Do you have an opening statement, member for Unley?

Mr PISONI: I will make a few comments, Chair. First of all, I would like to thank the minister for her generous comments in regard to both the work I do as the shadow minister for multicultural affairs and the work of my parliamentary secretary, Jing Lee. I think it is fair to say that one of those areas where there is true bipartisan support in South Australian politics is multicultural communities in South Australia, and really, that is the only way it is going to work.

The only way we will see South Australia receive the full benefit of our multicultural communities is for them to be embraced and supported by all sides of politics, so that we know there is a consistent policy for our multicultural community and that, regardless of who is in government, everyone will be welcome not only to migrate to South Australia and become South Australian citizens but also to participate in the South Australian community.

I cannot help spending a few minutes looking at this committee, which itself is a beneficiary of some of the early migration to South Australia. We have the member for Davenport; Duluk is, of course, a Polish name.

Mr DULUK: A very traditional Polish name.

Mr PISONI: A very traditional Polish name. I do not know how common it is. I have not seen it very often in Australia and I am not familiar with how common it is in Poland. Of course, his father was Australian-born of Polish migrants, which would make the member for Davenport the second Australian-born generation, but the third generation actually participating in Australia. It is the same with Mr Tarzia, my colleague the member for Hartley. Again, his grandparents were migrants, as was my father in the early 1950s. South Australia has definitely benefited enormously from the multicultural community that we have here in South Australia.

As my father often comments, it was a very English place when he arrived in 1952, and we should congratulate those who put up with quite a bit of discrimination in the early days to break down those barriers. I think, in all fairness, it did not take very long for those, if you like, English-type Australians, those from the old country, to work out what a tremendous contribution the non-English-speaking people were making to South Australia.

If it is okay, I would like to move to some questions now. My first question relates to Budget Paper 4, Volume 1, page 123. This is the multicultural grants outlined in the financial commentary. It states that extra expenses are primarily due to increases in grants to multicultural organisations; I think there is $0.4 million. Are you able to provide a list as to where those grants were and give us the exact figures?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: You are seeking which specific of the grants?

Mr PISONI: Yes.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: All of the grants?

Mr PISONI: If you have those, they could be brought back to the committee; that would be appreciated. Also, if possible, the values as well.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I have the full list. Perhaps I can just touch on some of those on the list. I am happy to provide the list to the committee. We have this in alphabetical order, and perhaps the best thing for me to do is touch on perhaps one or two for each of the groups.

We supported the Adelaide and Metropolitan Malayalee Association in the last financial year for the cost of hall hire for the Onam Festival and also the cost of hall hire, light, sound and stage for the 2014 Kerala Festival, and some costs towards the sports meet. They were total costs of $7,220 over those three events.

We supported the Adelaide Bangladeshi Cultural Club with three grants: hire costs for the Bangladesh Food and Culture Festivals ($2,000); International Mother Language Day 2015; and the Bengali New Year 2015 ($3,000).

We supported the Adelaide Kannada Sangha Inc. with the cost of hall hire and banners for Kannada Rajyotsava ($1,500); the Adelaide Russian Ethnic School for the cost of theatre hire for the New Year Festival ($1,000); and the Adelaide Sri Lanka Buddhist Vihara Incorporated for hire costs for the Sri Lankan Curry Night 2014 ($1,500) and for their Sri Lankan New Year Festival and multicultural program ($3,200).

The Adelaide Tamil Association received support for the cost of hall hire for the Deepavali 2014 and for the Adelaide Pongal 2015 Harvest Festival. I attended that festival. It was a quite unique festival in Bonython Park, where we had 30 different pots of rice to become Pongal. What is really unique is that every family does it slightly differently, so there was great pride in tasting and determining the difference between those. We also supported them for the SANGAMAM 2015, and, if I remember correctly, some overseas artists came to celebrate with the Tamil Association.

The African Communities Council of South Australia received $1,000 for equipment hire for stage and sound and also $4,000 for the cost of hall and soccer ground hire for the Azande Young Dynasty of South Australia, and hire costs for Africa Day celebrations ($3,000) for the African community organisation of South Australia. We also supported the African Community Organisation of South Australia for venue hire, uniforms, transport, entertainment and security for the May Africa Day celebration; that was $7,960.

The Alliance Française received a grant towards furniture and venue hire for the French Christmas Markets of $4,500. I remember at the time that the mayor of Unley also attended that event, and I think that Unley council contributed towards that cost as well.

The Arabic Language and Culture Association of South Australia received $800 for venue hire and movie screening for their launch; the Armenian Cultural Association of South Australia received support for theatre hire costs for Aleppo, which was a production; and the Association of Latvian Organisations in South Australia sponsoring the SA Latvian Youth Group received support for some overseas performers and printing of the Latvian Youth Arts and Cultural Festival.

We supported the Australia Day Council with cost of materials ($5,000); the Sri Lankan Association, towards the eligible costs of the Sri Lankan Cultural and Food Fair 2015; the Australian Refugee Association with some costs towards their refugee week and 40^th anniversary celebration ($10,000); the Bangladesh Australian Society of South Australia with the cost of hall hire for the Bengali New Year ($1,200); and the cost of the 30^th anniversary event of the Bangladesh Australian Society. I was pleased to attend both of those events. It was the 30^th anniversary of probably one of the more established groups that we have in South Australia.

We supported the Bosnian and Herzegovinian Muslim Radio Program of South Australia ($2,670) for labels, cards, brochures, venue hire and insurance for The People of Srebrenica event 2015. I attended that event. That was the commemoration of the massacre. It was a deeply moving event. It was a massacre that happened in my lifetime and still today people are searching for the bodies of their missing relatives. It was an excellent and professional recognition of the search, that continues today.

We supported the Celebration of African Australians for the celebration of the African Australian Awards 2015 ($3,500); Chinatown Adelaide of South Australia towards the Chinese New Year Festival ($15,000); Chinese Language Teacher Association of South Australia for printing and a banner for the Chinese Language Award ceremony ($750); the Chinese Welfare Services of South Australia for sponsoring the School of Chinese Music and Arts for the OzAsia Moon Lantern Festival ($720); the same organisation sponsoring Cantonese Opera Adelaide as part of the Cantonese Opera Concert 2015 ($1,500); the same organisation sponsoring the School of Chinese Music and Arts ($1,500) towards Chinese musical instruments; the Coordinating Italian Committee (or CIC as it is known) towards the cost of the Carnevale Italian Festival ($75,000); and Co.As.It, the Italian Assistance Association ($14,300) towards the cost of an Italian language android and management application.

We supported the Congolese Community Network Access with two grants, $2,000 for the festival and independence day and $4,000 towards the costume materials and tailor expenses for that culture and independence day 2015; the Coober Pedy Historical Society towards the cost of filming, editing and production costs for the Welcome Back to Coober Pedy 2015 Project ($3,300); the Coober Pedy Multicultural Community Forum towards the cost of the centenary celebration street party ($5,000); the Croatian Sports Centre of South Australia ($1,200); and the Don Dunstan Foundation towards the cost of the migration update ($5,000).

We supported Dozynki, which is the Polish community for equipment hire, printing and advertising for the Polish Harvest Festival ($6,000); Ethnic Radyo Pilipino towards the cost of material to make traditional Filipino costumes ($1,000); and the Federation of Hellenic Associations for Pensioners and Aged South Australia, which I think the member for Unley has been very supportive of many of their other areas of interest, for the cost of printing a book about the contribution of Greek pensioners in South Australia ($1,000).

We supported the Filipina Network of South Australia for eligible costs of the 2015 Philippine Fiesta of South Australia ($6,900). If I recall, I understand the member for Unley was also at that event. What I was incredibly pleased with at that event is that they brought together five Filipino associations as a working group to have the Philippine Fiesta. We will continue to talk to them about giving that Fiesta major festival status. It was particularly memorable because the focus, although there was dancing and culture, was the roast pig which was something that they spoke to me about with pride and it is a big part of that culture.

The Glendi Greek Festival, $60,000 to support that; the Greek Orthodox Community and Parish of Norwood and Eastern Suburbs, tables, chairs and dance floor for the 2015 Norwood Greek Festival, $4,000. It was only about 40° that night but still the crowd was magnificent and a great turnout.

The Greek Orthodox Community of South Australia, 25^th Celebration of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, $3,000; and also the same group, cost of venue launch, lectures, culture evening, printing and the cost of the 2014 George Street Community Greek Festival; Greek Orthodox Community of the Nativity of Christ Port Adelaide and Environs, equipment hire for the 2015 Semaphore Greek Festival, $6,000.

The Hindu Society of South Australia, $5,000 for the installation and purchase of new audiovisual system; the Guru Nanak Society of Australia, towards the cost of staging and marquees for the Lohri Mela 2015, $3,500; the Indian Australian Association of South Australia, the most significant funding was towards the cost of the Indian Mela, $20,000, but also support for Indian Independence Day celebrations and technical services for the 2014 Diwali event.

The Iraqi Women's Voice of South Australia towards the eligible costs for the Eid Festival for Arabic Speaking Women and Families, $2,520; the Islamic Information Centre of South Australia, $5,000 towards the Multicultural Eid Al Fitr Festival and $2,000 towards the cost of equipment hire for the Eid Al Adha Multicultural Festival.

The Japan Australia Friendship Association, $15,000 towards the Kodomo-no-Hi (Children's Day) Japan Festival 2015; the Korean Community of South Australia, towards hire costs for the 10^th Korean Culture and Food Festival, $8,000. We also supported the 11^th Korean Cultural and Food Festival for $10,000.

Laziza Festival Incorporated, marquee hire for the Laziza Mediterranean Festival 2015, $8,000; the Liberian Community of South Australia received two grants, cost to deliver a forum using religion to promote peace, unity and harmony, $2,150; and towards the costs of Liberia's 168^th Independence Day Celebrations, $5,000.

Messinian Association, towards bus hire costs to transport disadvantaged CALD members to regional soccer matches in Port Elliot and Port Pirie, $1,700; the Middle Eastern Communities Council of South Australia, towards the cost of the Nowruz Festival, $5,500; the Migrant Resource Centre sponsoring the Fusions Beats which participated in the OzAsia Moon Lantern Festival, $875; and the same group, towards the hire and marketing, promotional and administrative costs for the 2015 Limestone Coast Harmony Day events, $3,500.

One of the things that the Migrant Resource Centre does is that it is often a lead supporter to help people apply for grants and they have done that for the Federation of African Communities Councils in Australia for the national conference of the federation; and also in sponsoring MRCSA and the Hawke Centre towards SA Refugee Week. I commend them for their support. In particular, they received $50,000 towards the cost of the Domestic and Family Violence Awareness and Prevention in New and Emerging Communities project.

Millicent Community Access Radio, which sponsors Millicent Community Access Radio Inc. Radio 5THE FM, $15,000 towards the cost of purchasing two Audio Arts slot consoles and for broadcast training; Multicultural Communities Council of SA, $14,600 towards eligible costs of the Future Building from the Past, history gathering project; Multifaith Association of SA, towards the cost of printing, advertising and venue hire for their 2014 Interfaith Symposium.

The Overseas Chinese Association of SA towards the cost of marquee hire for the 'Infused: All About Tea' event, $1,000; the Pakistani Australia Association of South Australia received two grants, one for $6,000 towards staging, lighting and sound for the Pakistani Australian Festival and towards two-way radios and chafing dishes, $1,000.

The Pan Macedonian Association of South Australia, towards the hire cost for the 36^th Dimitria Greek Festival, $4 000; the Papua New Guinea Association of South Australia Incorporated, $1,500 for the PNG Independence Day celebration; Port Lincoln Tunarama, towards the hire and printing costs of the Mosaic on Eyre Project, $4,000; the Punjabi Association of South Australia, towards equipment hire for the 2014 Diwali Mela Festival, $2,000; the Riverland Greek Pensioners Aged and Younger Disabled Association towards the cost of bus hire; the Riverland Youth Theatre, sponsoring Riverland Harmony Day organising committee, and the cultural event in 2015, $6,700.

The Serbian Community Radio Program, towards the cost of a USB, CD and laptop for the Vidovdan Celebration 2015, $2,500; the Sikh Society of South Australia, towards eligible costs for the annual Vaisakhi Dinner and Dance 2015, $4,500. They also sponsored the Welfare Club of the Sikh Society of South Australia towards hire costs for the Punjabi Mela in 2014.

The Solomon Islands Wantok Association of South Australia, $1,600 for the Solomon Islands Interstate Games; Somali Bantu Community Association of Australia, $1,000 for hall hire for the Independence Day and Eid celebrations. They also sponsored SUCASA Incorporated, sponsoring WellnessXperts towards portable workout equipment for fitness and wellbeing for the Somali population, $1,500.

Sophia Ecumenical Feminist Spirituality Incorporated, sponsoring Pictures in My Heart, towards the cost of printing and launching the Pictures in My Heart: Sharing stories and supporting refugees book, $14,920; the South Australian German Association towards the hire costs of the 2015 Schutzenfest, $20,000.

The South Australian Bangladeshi Community Association received three grants for the hall hire and sound system for the Pohela Boishak event in 2014 and Bengali New Year in 2015, and Bijoy Dibosh 2014, $3,600. The South Australian Council for the Greek Cultural Month Incorporated, $5,000 towards the stage and production costs of Greece, Mother of Mine 2015; the South Australian Lebanese Women's Association towards eligible costs of Global Village: Where the world comes together, $7,260.

The St Catherine Society of South Australia, a Maltese community, received three grants towards gazebos and flags, venue hire for the St Catherine Feast Ball, and towards the costs of the Feast of the Catherine Celebration.

St Spyridon's Greek Orthodox Community—I think that is in your electorate, member for Unley—towards equipment hire for the 2015 Delphi Bank Unley Greek Festival, $5,000; TAFE SA towards the cost of the Women's Leadership Course, $12,000.

The Telugu Association of South Australia had three grants: the TASA Winter Get Together, $500; the Ugadi Celebrations, which is Telugu New Year, $2,330, and the costs of the 2014 Deepavali Celebrations, $2,000.

The Burundian Community of South Australia, celebrations of their 10^th anniversary and 53^rd Multicultural Independence Day, $4,400. I understand I was represented there by the member for Little Para, so thank you for that.

The Bantu Ethnic Community of South Australia, $10,000 towards the cost of governance and volunteer training and $4,000 towards the cost of purchasing office equipment. The Burmese Christian Community of South Australia, towards the venue and equipment hire for the Living Well in Australia Information Seminars 2015, $3,540; the Congo-Kinshasa Council of South Australia, $4,430 towards eligible costs of the anniversary and Independence Day event 2015; the Dutch Community, towards eligible costs for the Dutch Festival, $12,000; the Greek Orthodox Community of Port Pire, $10,000 towards the costs of the St George Greek Community 90^th Anniversary 2015.

The Igbo Community of South Australia, which is the Nigerian community, towards their sound system hire, $2,000; and also venue hire for the Iri-Ji Festival 2015.

The Kenyan Association received three grants for Madaraka Day for $1,000, and I think the member for Unley attended that event, as did I; the 2014 Kenyan Independence Day and KASA 10-year anniversary celebration; and, $3,970 towards the eligible costs of Madaraka Gala 2015.

The Society of St Hilarion Incorporated (sponsoring the Society of St Hilarion aged care), $2,000 towards the hire costs of St Hilarion feast day; the Sudanese Cultural and Social Society of South Australia, $2,000 for the men's soccer team; the Tongan Community Association hall hire, $750; and the Ugandan community of South Australia received two grants, venue hire for Independence Day celebrations, $500, and the costs of cultural costumes, drums and equipment for cultural events, $2,440.

We supported the Ukrainian Women's Association for the cost of their Festival of 65 years of Ukrainian Dance in SA, $2,100. The Ethnic Link Services, as part of UnitingCare Wesley, Port Adelaide, $10,000 for Connecting to Community and Culture: An IT Education Learning Project; the Vietnamese Community of South Australia, towards costs of Tet, $20,000; and, Welfare Rights Centre, towards costs of multilanguage fact sheets and forums, $15,000. While I have not detailed every single grant, I have done the majority.

The CHAIR: I hope, minister, you will furnish us with the rest of that list later.

Mr PISONI: For fear of another 15-minute answer, can the minister advise how much of 2015-16 multicultural grants budget has already been finalised? I ask that perhaps for those that have been confirmed a list be provided. I would be happy to move that it be inserted into Hansard without reading it.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I could summarise that list: there has been a substantial increase, so the majority of the money in the budget has not been distributed or allocated per se.

Mr PISONI: Actually allocated, not distributed.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Has not been allocated. However, we have core areas of support, such as the Migrant Communities Council.

Ms WALLACE: The core funding for the Multicultural Communities Council for the Ethnic Broadcasters Association for the Migrant Resource Centre—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: So there are about five or six that have what I call 'core funding', and then there are those major festivals that have three years of funding. While they are the ones you would have attended quite regularly, we are happy to provide you with a full list.

Mr PISONI: Could that full list also include any commitments for annual funding for events over the forward estimates?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Annual funding for 2014-15 for the major festivals was $195,000. At this stage I would expect the allocation would be a similar figure, but because we have additional ability to support, that will go up, but that is what would have been allocated for 2015-16.

The CHAIR: To clarify, the list you have committed to providing to the committee will be provided by 30 October—it will not be inserted into Hansard immediately.

Mr PISONI: No problem. I refer to page 112 of Volume 1. I refer to expenses, and so forth: can you provide the committee with the annual budget last year and for next year of SAMEAC?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: In 2014-25, $105,000 was allocated by Multicultural SA to support the role and function of SAMEAC. They were also supported by three FTEs from the department at a cost of approximately $297,000. The allocated budget for 2015-16 is $105,000, allocated for Multicultural SA to support the role and function of SAMEAC, and it will be supported by those three FTEs at a cost of $304,425.

Mr PISONI: So the budget is 305 and then there is 340,000 in support. Is it like buildings and staff who work within a department?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Sorry, can you ask that question again?

Mr PISONI: You mentioned $105,000. That is—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Supporting the role and function.

Mr PISONI: Okay. You then mention $304,000.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: For the three FTEs.

Mr PISONI: So they are staff.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes.

Mr PISONI: So the $105,000 is the chairman and the board members. And what about expenses? Is there a budget for expenses?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: That would be incorporated in the $105,000.

Mr PISONI: Can I have a breakdown of the 56.4 FTEs as of 30 June 2015-16, which is in your budget. How many of those are in the translation services area? Perhaps you could give a breakdown of where the others are, what roles they are in.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Sure. You said 56.4?

Mr PISONI: Yes, which is your budgeted figure for 2015-16.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Multicultural SA has 11.4 FTEs assigned to the Policy and Community Development division, of which 8.4 FTEs support policy development, community engagement and grant making programs and three FTEs support the role of SAMEAC, as already discussed. The Interpreting and Translating Centre employs 10 FTEs and over 300 casual interpreters and translators who undertake assignments equivalent to 30.1 FTEs.

Mr PISONI: So that accounts for the total. Okay.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes.

Mr PISONI: Regarding the policy area, it says here in your objectives that Multicultural SA provides advice to the government on cultural, linguistic and religious diversity matters. Did your department offer any advice to the education department dealing with the inquiries about the Islamic College at Croydon?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Not that I am aware of.

Mr PISONI: Were you asked to provide any advice?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: No.

Mr PISONI: Obviously you spoke about the grants that were granted; do you have the number of grants that were applied for?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I will endeavour to get that answer for you.

Mr PISONI: Just the number, minister.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It appears that I do not have the number of applications for grants, but the applications funded were 188, as I have just listed, the average grant being about $5,000.

Mr PISONI: You will bring back to the committee the number of applications?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I am happy to take that on notice.

Mr PISONI: Can you advise what the process is in allocating the grants? Once the department receives a grant, what is the process, first of all, for the grant going forward? How is that decided? Also, how is it decided whether the grant is provided and whether all of it or part of it is provided? Can you explain the process?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It is my understanding—and I will ask Ms Wallace to provide extra detail—that there are several rounds per year where we assess those grants. Two members of SAMEAC sit on the Grants Advisory Committee, and also people from the Department for Communities and Social Inclusion, and they put forward to me as the minister their recommendations. Quite often I note that they do not support the full grant that is applied for and they may often recommend a smaller amount.

Mr PISONI: And are terms and conditions from the government ever part of receiving those grants?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It would be my understanding that there would be fairly standard terms and conditions on acquittal of that grant, but I will ask Ms Wallace for more detail.

Ms WALLACE: A grant-successful organisation would receive a service agreement and sign off on that service agreement with the conditions of the grant.

Mr PISONI: And with the service agreement, are there opportunities for specific terms of the grant for that particular organisation or that particular event?

Ms WALLACE: It would depend on the size of the grant through to the nature of the grant or the purpose of the grant.

Mr PISONI: So what you are saying, minister, is that there is an opportunity for specific terms for specific purposes or specific organisations or events.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It is my understanding that there would be a fairly standard service agreement for these grants. In fact, the key thing we are working on is simplifying the grants process. Obviously I will come back to the house to talk about that, because, particularly if you have a very small grant, we want to make it as easy as possible for people to apply and to acquit that grant. So we continue to simplify and reduce red tape as part of that. However, I am not specifically aware of set requirements or additional requirements on individual communities as part of the grant.

Mr PISONI: So there is never an occasion where there would be advice from the department to, for example, exclude from the invitation list one group or one person—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Sorry; I thought you were referring to the service level agreement.

Mr PISONI: I am referring to conditions of receiving the grant.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: That would be a recommendation from the Grant Advisory Council (the GAC, as we call it). Obviously there are guidelines for people to apply.

Mr PISONI: Yes, but I am asking whether there have been occasions where grants have been received and then there has been correspondence, or alternatively advice, to avoid inviting a particular person or a particular group to the function or the event.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I think you are referring to whether there is a condition on that grant, for example.

Mr PISONI: Yes, or even advice that is given with that grant.

Ms WALLACE: I am not aware of any recommendations to exclude people from attending events. They most certainly would not be included as part of the service agreement.

Mr TARZIA: Minister, I have some omnibus questions for you:

1. Will the minister provide a detailed breakdown of expenditure on consultants and contractors above $10,000 in 2014-15 for all departments and agencies reporting to the minister listing the name of the consultant, contractor or service supplier, cost, work undertaken and method of appointment?

2. For each department or agency reporting to the minister in 2014-15, please provide the number of public servants broken down into heads and FTEs that are (1) tenured and (2) on contract and, for each category, provide a breakdown of the number of (1) executives and (2) non-executives.

3. In the financial year 2014-15, for all departments and agencies reporting to the minister, what underspending on projects and programs (1) was and (2) was not approved by cabinet for carryover expenditure in 2015-16?

4. Between 30 June 2014 and 30 June 2015, will the minister list the job title and total employment cost of each position with a total estimated cost of $100,000 or more—(1) which has been abolished and (2) which has been created?

5. For each year of the forward estimates, provide the name and budget of all grant programs administered by all departments and agencies reporting to the minister and, for 2014-15, provide a breakdown of expenditure on all grants administered by all departments and agencies reporting to the minister listing the name of the grant recipient, the amount of the grant and the purpose of the grant and whether the grant was subject to a grant agreement as required by Treasurer's Instruction 15.

6. For each department or agency reporting to the minister, what is the budget for targeted voluntary separation packages for the financial years 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, and 2018-19?

7. What is the title and total employment cost of each individual staff member in the minister's office as at 30 June 2015, including all departmental employees seconded to ministerial offices and ministerial liaison officers?

The CHAIR: Thank you, member for Hartley. I now declare the examination of the Minister for Multicultural Affairs completed, and thank everyone for a respectful discussion. The committee stands adjourned until 1.30pm.

Sitting suspended from 12:29 to 13:30.