Estimates Vote

Department of Human Services, $940,430,000

Administered Items for the Department of Human Services, $189,301,000

Minister:

Hon. J.M.A. Lensink, Minister for Human Services.

Departmental Advisers:

Ms L. Boswell, Chief Executive, Department of Human Services.

Mr N. Ashley, Chief Financial Officer, Finance and Business Services, Department of Human Services.

Ms K. Hawkins, Executive Director, Strategic Policy and Reform, Department of Human Services.

Ms K. Biggins, Acting Executive Director, Community Investment and Support, Department of Human Services.

Ms F. Curnow, Acting Executive Director, Community and Family Services, Department of Human Services.

The CHAIR: Good morning everybody and welcome back to Estimates Committee B. I will just read some opening remarks as we start and get underway today for the benefit of those joining us. The estimates committees are a relatively informal procedure and, as such, there is no need to stand to ask or answer questions. I understand that the minister and the lead speaker for the opposition have agreed on an approximate time for the consideration of proposed payments, which will facilitate a change of departmental advisers. Can the minister and the lead speaker for the opposition please confirm that the timetable for today's proceedings, previously distributed, remains accurate?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Yes.

Ms COOK: Yes.

The CHAIR: Very good. Changes to committee membership will be notified as they occur. Members should ensure that the Chair is provided with a completed request to be discharged form, and we have a few of those to attend to in a second. If the minister undertakes to supply information at a later date, it must be submitted to the Clerk Assistant via the answers to questions mailbox no later than Friday 24 September 2021.

I propose to allow both the minister and the lead speaker for the opposition to make opening statements of around 10 minutes each, should they wish. There will be a flexible approach to giving the call for asking questions. A member who is not a member of the committee may ask a question at the discretion of the Chair. All questions are to be directed to the minister, not to the minister's advisers. The minister may refer questions to an adviser for a response, should they wish.

Questions must be based on lines of expenditure in the budget papers and must be identifiable and/or referenced. Members unable to complete their questions during the proceedings may submit them as questions on notice for inclusion in the assembly Notice Paper. I remind members that the rules of debate in the house apply in committee. Consistent with the rules of the house, photography by members from the chamber floor is not permitted while the committee is sitting.

Ministers and members may not table documents before the committee. However, documents can be supplied to the Chair for distribution. The incorporation of material in Hansard is permitted on the same basis as applies in the house, that is, that it is purely statistical and limited to one page in length. The committee's examination will be broadcast in the same manner as sittings of the house are broadcast, through the IPTV system within Parliament House via the webstream link to the internet and the Parliament of South Australia video-on-demand broadcast system.

We have had advice from the Deputy Clerk around the wearing of masks in the proceedings today, so I will quickly outline that. Masks should be worn by all persons who are able to do so when in Parliament House. This includes during estimate committees, with the exception of a range of reasons, including eating, drinking, etc., one of those being the visibility of your mouth and where clear enunciation is important. For example, members and ministers who are participating in committees need to have clear enunciation for Hansard and broadcast purposes. I leave it up to members to interpret that as they wish during the proceedings today, and also recognise that a number of members have pre-existing health conditions that may change their ability to wear a mask.

In the first session today we are dealing with proposed payments in regard to the portfolio of the Department of Human Services. The minister appearing today is the Minister for Human Services. I declare the proposed payments open for examination and call on the minister to make an opening statement, if she wishes.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will start by introducing the departmental people we have with us today: Ms Lois Boswell, Chief Executive, Department of Human Services; Mr Nick Ashley, chief financial officer, finance and business services; Fiona Curnow, acting executive director, community and family services; Katherine Hawkins, executive director, strategic policy and reform; Trevor Lovegrove, director, screening unit, community investment and support; and Kelly Biggins, acting executive director, community investment and support.

I do have an opening statement, Mr Chairman. This year has been one of significant change and reform, with planning and implementation continuing within the context of the pandemic and its impact on vulnerable members of our families and communities. In the child and family space, the reform of the child and family support system is building a connected system of evidence-based support services for earlier intervention with families who have multiple complex needs.

In March 2021, the recommissioning of evidence-informed intensive family support services was completed, including 30 per cent of the funding being directly provided to Aboriginal community controlled organisations (ACCOs). The new intensive family services programs, funded at $52 million over four years, replaced the targeted intervention service and family preservation service with an additional $1 million per annum to support an increased service response in country regions. The new services will work to tangible outcomes, including increasing family functioning and the safety of children.

On 31 May 2021, the government launched the Adults Supporting Kids (ASK) website. The department has also commissioned a range of other early intervention and prevention programs and services, including, for example, two intensive support pilots for families at imminent risk of child removal. Safe Kids, Families Together, which is a three-year pilot in the northern suburbs delivered by Anglicare, has now been extended for an additional year to June 2022 to allow for further evaluation to occur.

There is a two-year pilot in the western suburbs for Aboriginal families. This program is delivered by Kornar Winmil Yunti, an ACCO. The Tiraapendi Wodli Port Adelaide justice reinvestment project aims to improve safety and wellbeing for Aboriginal families in the Port Adelaide and western area. Breathing Space is a service targeting young women whose children have been removed and placed in the child protection system and are at risk of repeat removals for future children.

In addition, the Department of Human Services has commenced a new pathway service as a central pathway for child protection, education, and a multiagency protection service in health to seek intensive family services for children experiencing child protection concerns. It provided $700,000 in funding to support ACCOs to build workforce capacity, clinical governance and service delivery, developed a trauma responsive framework for organisational capacity building for trauma response practice, which is due for release in August this year, and commenced a trial to establish a common assessment of outcomes, including measuring family function and child safety across all child and family safety services. These reform activities will ensure better practice across the system as a whole and align with the state government's 'Safe and well: supporting families, protecting children' strategy.

I would also like to reflect on our work on the APY lands. When the NDIS was first introduced there was a limited choice of disability service providers on the APY lands and DHS agreed to continue to provide disability services until 30 June 2021. The APY team has been working with the National Disability Insurance Agency to support the development of new disability services on the lands and is assisting APY clients to transition from DHS to NDIS services. There are now more than 140 APY residents with NDIS plans.

DHS will continue to have a presence on the lands through various funded programs, including Youth Sheds, the Mimili Family Wellbeing Centre and the Community Connections Program, and working with continuity of care, that is, aged clients and vulnerable adults identified through the APY complex needs project.

In terms of screening, the NDIS worker screening, now known as the NDIS worker check in South Australia, commenced nationally on 1 February 2021, except for in the Northern Territory. The outcome of all NDIS worker screenings is recorded on the National Worker Screening Database hosted by the NDIS commission. On 17 March 2021, the screening unit connected to the working with children check national referencing system, which will enable the exchange of information between screening units about negative working with children check decisions across Australia.

The Department of Human Services also administers concessions, and in 2021 an estimated 210,000 eligible South Australians received household concessions, including water, sewerage and energy concessions and the Cost of Living Concession. In May 2021, the Switch for Solar trial was launched in partnership with the Department for Energy and Mining. The trial provides the opportunity for eligible concession home owners to switch their energy concession and Cost of Living Concession for a period of 10 years in exchange for the supply and installation of a free or low-cost solar photovoltaic system.

A technology review of the Personal Alert Systems Rebate Scheme, now Personal AlertSA, was completed, including a competitive tender process, which expanded the range of devices available to now include falls detection and GPS.

The new Aboriginal languages interpreting service will begin a phased rollout in late 2021. The service will play a critical role in supporting Aboriginal communities to achieve equitable access to government health and justice services in South Australia. National reforms, such as the NDIS My Aged Care and Carer Gateway, necessitated a review of the 30-year legacy Home and Community Care (HACC) program administered by DHS to develop a more contemporary program that better reflects the current environment and community needs in South Australia.

Following extensive consultation with HACC providers, clients and peak bodies, the Community Connections Program was developed. The program is designed to enhance people's independence and reduce social isolation by strengthening people's connections with communities, social networks and services. Key components of the Community Connections Program commenced on 3 May, with the formal commencement beginning on 1 July 2021.

For the past six months, DHS has been working intensely with HACC service providers to support the transition of their clients to suitable alternative services, including the new Community Connections Program, and will continue to do so to ensure South Australians receive the most appropriate support to meet their needs.

As members would be aware, recent legislative changes within the gambling portfolio have expanded the scope of the Gamblers Rehabilitation Fund to provide for prevention, public education, treatment, information and advice, and gambling research. The Office for Problem Gambling has undertaken a significant consultation and co-design process with key stakeholders in the South Australian gambling landscape, including those with lived experience of gambling harm. I expect to be able to make further announcements about this exciting new initiative to address gambling harm in South Australia later in the year.

I turn to the support for the community during COVID-19. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, DHS has worked closely with community and service providers to ensure the continuation of high-quality services. In addition, the Marshall Liberal government introduced a range of measures to support people whose income and employment prospects were significantly affected by COVID-19, including a one-off boost of $500 and bringing forward the 2020-21 COLC payments to international students to support those who had lost income during the pandemic, a residential rental grant scheme and paid pandemic leave.

The DHS Interpreting and Translating Centre supported the South Australian government departments to communicate with and deliver vital COVID-19 services to non-English-speaking people and their families, including providing telephone interpreting services to the COVID-19 helpline, the medi-hotel teams and the mental health sector, especially for those in quarantine; engaging highly skilled and experienced translators to translate critical public health information on COVID-19 symptoms, risk factors, testing and treatment; providing support to SA Health clinicians and hospital staff to communicate with non-English-speaking patients with COVID-19 and their families; supporting SA Health to conduct contact tracing phone interviews with people testing positive to COVID-19 and their close contacts; and supporting interstate contact tracing teams, including some in Melbourne.

My department supported the community through the impacts of COVID-19 by administering the $4.1 million Vulnerable South Australians Support Package, which provided financial resilience and emergency relief programs for South Australians who were newly vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic, including:

$1.75m to existing financial resilience and wellbeing services;

a doubling of the Emergency Financial Assistance Program;

continued support for food relief agencies such as Foodbank, OzHarvest and Secondbite;

further support for the not-for-profit microfinance provider Good Shepherd to improve access to no or low interest microfinance loan products, targeting sole traders and small business owners impacted by COVID-19 as well as small cash loans to consumers.

Grants SA continued with the COVID-19 support grants providing further support to community organisations to adapt their services in response to COVID-19, providing just under $1.8 million in funding to a range of South Australian community organisations.

The Reconnect Grant 2020-21 opened in March 2021 and focused on funding projects that supported community enhancement and reconnection activities in recognition of recovery needs within the community—

Ms COOK: Point of order.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am nearly finished.

Ms COOK: You took up more than 10 minutes.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Did I?

Ms COOK: Yes, you did.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Well, I got lost in the detail, but I am nearly finished, Mr Chairman.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, the minister has 10 minutes. I concluded my opening remarks at 9.05. That is consistent with what I have done every morning of the estimates so far. I should add the minister is entitled to 10 minutes. She has indicated she is not far away. I will give her the benefit of the doubt in that regard.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will just start that sentence again. The Reconnect Grant 2020-21 opened in March 2021 and focused on funding projects that supported community enhancement and reconnection activities in recognition of recovery needs within the community following the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

I expect to be making an announcement about the successful applicants soon. As honourable members would appreciate, during the past year my department has been actively getting on with business as usual, in addition to progressing some very significant reforms and providing critical supports and assistance to South Australians, particularly those impacted by COVID-19.

The CHAIR: Lead speaker for the opposition, did you wish to make an opening statement?

Ms COOK: Thank you to all the department people for attending. Budget Paper 5, page 53—

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, just to be clear, the same as I have had in this chamber this week, if you could please wait for the call for questions, that would be much appreciated. Member for Hurtle Vale.

Ms COOK: Budget Paper 5, page 53. I refer to the commitment of funding for a safeguarding smartphone app. Can the minister advise who was consulted with in regard to the proposed development of the new safeguarding app and who exactly in the disabled community is the app designed for?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think in relation to the honourable member's question, she might be getting the cart before the horse somewhat in that we have not actually developed it yet.

Ms COOK: I said proposed development, to clarify.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Yes, the honourable member has correctly identified that government has committed $500,000 in funding through the 2021-22 state budget for a safeguarding smartphone app to be developed with further conditional funding of up to $250,000 from the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission. The initiative will aim to improve the accessibility for people with disability to connect with existing safeguarding bodies, including the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, the Health and Community Services Complaints Commission, the Adult Safeguarding Unit, disability advocacy services and emergency services.

The safeguarding smartphone app will also aim to offer virtual visits that will complement and enhance the existing Community Visitor Scheme. This function will allow users to request and potentially book in real time a visit with available volunteers and enable a virtual telediscussion with the user. The function will need to expand its availability to all users—that is, all people with disability—in line with the capacity of the volunteers within the CVS. As the virtual visits will not be done under existing CVS legislation, the appointment and training of volunteers can be streamlined.

It is intended that this service will be a wellbeing check that will help users navigate and link with the right quality and safeguarding area rather than replace the existing CVS. The app will not be designed in a way that reduces the capacity for mainstream services to accept referrals directly, rather it will act as an additional support feature and will require significant consultation and testing prior to it being officially launched. I am not sure if I have answered the honourable member's question.

Ms COOK: To be specific, because you have not answered the part about who it is really designed for, how would a proposed app such as this assist someone, for example, like Annie Smith? With an app like this you would assume someone can firstly download then navigate the app, then if the app connects to a community volunteer, if requested, you would assume that the person seeking help is able to get their phone and seek this assistance. So how would it help somebody who is being wilfully restrained or precluded from using a device?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think the honourable member needs to be careful in the manner in which she is asking this question.

Ms COOK: I do not need to be schooled on this, thank you.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, you supplied commentary within your question. The minister is perfectly entitled to answer as she wishes.

Ms COOK: Yes.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Given that this case is one which still has a number of investigations going forward—

Ms COOK: No, that is only an example, minister. Anyone who—

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale!

Ms COOK: Can I withdraw the words 'Annie Smith'?

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, your question was given in silence from the minister. The answer will be provided in silence from the member.

Mr WHETSTONE: Yes, bad example.

Ms COOK: You are a fine example, Mr Whetstone.

The CHAIR: Please!

Ms COOK: You are a fine example.

The CHAIR: Members, I remind you that this process is for the benefit of the people of South Australia. Let's continue to have a cordial discussion today in the chamber.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Indeed, if we do refer to the horrible and tragic case of Ann Marie Smith's death last year, as the honourable member would be aware, we had a Safeguarding Taskforce, which she wilfully undermined, which came up with a range of recommendations that were directed to the specifics of that particular case. I have said publicly many times that probably the biggest failing in that entire system was that there was a single carer operating—

Ms COOK: Support worker.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: —to provide support services. The honourable member I am sure would not be trying to be ablest in any way or patronising to people with disability.

Ms COOK: No, they gave me these questions actually.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, I do not want to have to remind you again. The minister is entitled to be heard in silence.

Ms COOK: Patronising.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: They are a very diverse group of people, as she would probably appreciate, and they have a range of capacities. This government is very focused on inclusion. We are very focused on providing a range of support services. Apart from some members of the Labor Party I have not heard anyone say that this is a bad idea and is not going to actually assist people, so I think it will be very useful.

I have also spoken to the federal minister in relation to whether it could potentially assist in someone complaining about their provider, because we do hear often from people with disability that there is quite a confusing array of places that they may need to go to make a complaint about a particular matter. So we are very pleased that the federal government is supportive of this. We can provide a suite of options on an app that people can get to very easily. For what it is worth, the people I know who have disability do use technology. I think technology is going to open up a lot of opportunities for people with disability to live independent lives, which I would hope all members are supportive of into the future.

Ms COOK: So how exactly would this help somebody who cannot access their technological device to seek assistance?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think I have already answered that question.

Ms COOK: Given that this refers to a community volunteer, an introduction of a community visitor scheme of sorts, what are the requisite skills that the volunteer would have and how would the volunteers be recruited, screened and supported? How would they then assist?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I imagine that they would be very much similar to the current community visitors. There is an induction scheme. I understand that the training is quite intensive. Of course we would screen them. One of the things that we particularly know through COVID is that some of our older volunteers decided to cease working as volunteers, so I would be quite hopeful that we could recruit from some of those older groups. They also have peer support. Given that it is a virtual visit, there is a whole range of opportunities for people to be able to be involved in this.

Ms COOK: How would an air of neglect be detected with an app?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am not sure I understand what the member is getting at, Mr Chairman.

Ms COOK: Minister, how would a person experiencing significant paranoia, who believes their phone is actually talking to them, access your phone operated digital virtual community visitor app?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: People who have mental health difficulties can access an app, I would have thought. Perhaps the honourable member could drop her ableism for a minute and actually talk to some people with disability—

Ms COOK: Mr Chair, I resent that, actually. I do take offence to that remark and I ask that the minister withdraws it. I am giving questions that have been provided to me by consumers.

The CHAIR: The member for Hurtle Vale has taken offence to a comment made by the minister. Is the minister happy to withdraw?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am happy to drop it, but I do note that I—

Ms COOK: Drop it or withdraw it?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will withdraw it, whatever the terminology is, but I do note that—

The CHAIR: Let's—

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I have not finished my response yet—but I do note that there are references to ableism in this chamber on a regular basis from members who sit in her seat.

The CHAIR: Minister, there has not been a question asked; therefore, there is not an answer to be given.

Ms COOK: I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 94. I refer to the 2020-21 estimated total expenses figure for the disability program, specifically the government's financial commitment to the Quentin Kenihan Inclusive Playspace. Minister, you cut the ribbon on the Quentin Kenihan Inclusive Playspace on 17 December, put out a media release on 18 December and spoke on radio about the playground as well. What input did you have into the design of the playground? You and your department, just to clarify.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We were expecting these in the disability section.

Ms COOK: They are under inclusion, I think, sorry.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: As the honourable member noted, in December 2020 the state government did contribute $1 million to build an inclusive play space in the Adelaide CBD in honour of Mr Quentin Kenihan. Although the build was completed after the inclusive play guidelines had been released in December 2019, it is understood that the Touched by Olivia Foundation guidelines were referred to during the planning stage. In April 2021, an article was published in The Advertiser stating the Adelaide City Council needed to spend $200,000 to fix potential hazards for children in wheelchairs and the blind community. The Adelaide City Council has responded to the concerns raised and is working closely with a project advisory group, including representatives of Mr Kenihan's family and friends to address the necessary changes.

Ms COOK: Minister, were you aware that the playground was not fit for purpose or meeting the guidelines of the Inclusive SA guiding principles or compliant with the Disability Discrimination Act when you announced the play space was on time and on budget?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: No, I was not aware that there were any issues with the playground. I am not an expert in inclusive play. However, having been made aware of the Hendry Street Reserve Inclusive Playground, we were keen to make sure that local government particularly had a toolkit that they were able to refer to so that they could improve these designs. As I referred to previously, the Touched by Olivia Foundation was involved not just with the Hendry Street one but with the Adelaide City Council one.

When I went to the opening with Lord Mayor Sandy Verschoor, the project officer from the council was there, as were a number of members of the public and some of Quentin's friends and family, who are often referred to as 'Team Q'. A couple of those people raised with me specific concerns that they had, after which I introduced them to the project manager to say, 'These issues have been identified. Can you address them?' I think that the council had been continuing to go through that process to ensure they were addressing any concerns that people had.

Ms COOK: Given that a further $500,000 has needed to be spent to bring the playground up to standard, was this on budget and did you push for the opening or did anybody in your department push for the opening so that you could have the on-time announcement and photo op?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: That is just a ridiculous suggestion. We are not pushy people in DHS—we are very kind.

Ms COOK: Thank you. I will move on to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 88. I refer to the third activity indicator about rebates for systems provided through PASA. When you informed the public that a rigorous procurement process to test the devices had been undertaken, what was your understanding of the process? Was it that the devices were tested themselves, or is it that a rigorous procurement process is a desktop audit on specifications?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think there are a few issues to unpack there. The honourable member being a person in the health sphere would be aware that the medical device market has come a very long way. It has been around for quite some time, but there is a lot of competition in that space and we were keen to make sure that we had the best available devices for people, particularly given that this scheme has been operating since, I think, 2012 (someone will correct me if that is not correct). Things have moved a long way. We were keen to make sure we were getting the best devices available in the market, and that is what we believe we have done.

I think it is worth pointing out that falls technology and GPS functionality are very useful things. People who might not be steady on their feet probably are older than they were in the past, as we are all living longer lives, and it gives them peace of mind that, if they are going for a walk in the park and they have a fall, they can use their device.

In terms of testing for the particular device, my understanding is that all of the tender submitters, if that is the right terminology, were required to provide the technological specifications with their submission. This was then evaluated by Flinders University in a desktop study, and a range of functionality tests, as well as price and all those sorts of things, were part of the consideration, along with the standard 15 per cent loading that is applied to local providers.

Ms COOK: I understand through FOI that an email where Flinders University was unwilling to endorse the outcome of their audit and referred to unheeded concerns as part of their scope assessment of devices was sent. Can the minister advise what Flinders University was referring to when they talked about unheeded concerns?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The advice I have received is that Flinders University was satisfied at the end of the process. I will get some more detail for the honourable member in relation to that particular quote. No doubt, as is often the case, particularly in this chamber, things have been quoted out of context.

Ms COOK: I will happily provide it. In changing from PARS to PASA, apart from the fact that clearly this outsourcing to interstate providers has removed business from six local providers, has the change in delivery actually created a greater uptake of the scheme or any meaningful outcome improvement, or is it really now just supporting interstate providers where we could have had local and regional jobs?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The honourable member has tried to prosecute this case on radio many times and I will give her the same response: we unashamedly went for the best devices. These now have falls technology and GPS functionality, and people have more choice than having a pendant that hangs around their neck. Having interstate providers is nothing unusual in the market at all, and the standard procurement of 15 per cent was applied to the local providers, as it always is.

Ms COOK: Is the minister aware that the devices chosen under the new scheme will not afford protection should the mobile network they operate on fail? How does this meet the statement about being the most reliable?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The advice I have received is that every mobile network would have to fail for these devices to fail, and that is no different from the old devices.

Ms COOK: I understand that, during the last few weeks of January this year, there was a much higher than usual amount of applications received by PARS from elderly customers who wanted a choice of supplier that was at that point on the PARS supplier list on the DHS website—it was 167 applications. How many of those people who applied in January were given their choice of original provider?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: My advice is that there was a changeover date of 31 January. Any of the applications that were submitted and received prior to that date could choose the old devices, if that is what they wanted. I am advised that some people chose not to go with their existing providers and went with newer devices.

Ms COOK: So you do not have a number, out of the 167 that were applied for and provided prior to 31 January, of how many were actually given the choice of provider they had put on their form at that time.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: If they submitted their form prior to 31 January and requested one of the existing devices under the old scheme then that is what they would have been provided with.

Ms COOK: I would now like to talk to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 88. I refer to the activity indicators, specifically 'No. of Cost of Living Concessions provided', which shows that 201,000 concessions were provided to South Australians. The COVID boost payment I would presume is within that number, but I would be happy if that is clarified within the reply.

Can the minister advise how many South Australians received the COVID boost payment, and how many people in South Australia were eligible to receive it? I am happy to be given a point of time because it was across a year, so it is a bit rubbery. Perhaps if you want to pick June 2020 as a figure, that would work. This is from an eligibility point of view, because I know there is a total at the end—about 26, I think.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I thank the honourable member for her question. It is a little bit hard for us to know how many people are eligible because we do not keep that data. It would be dependent on their Centrelink eligibility and the like.

Ms COOK: I can advise, if you wish.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We do keep advertising these things. You have probably seen some of our press releases when we keep letting people know that they are probably eligible to take up the energy offers and those sorts of things, because we know that some people do not. Bear in mind, too, that because it is based on JobSeeker—what was Newstart—people's eligibility does change over time, whereas for those people who are aged pensioners or disability pensioners they tend to not move in and out of that system. In terms of the boost, we are just trying to see if we can find the—

Ms COOK: Do you want some help with the DSS stats? They are published quarterly.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: No, not really. I have answered that part of it. We are just trying to see if we have a figure of how many people. We do have the boost payment only—not the number of people, but we can figure it out. The actual amount was $9,588,000 for 2019-20 and for 2020-21 the actual expenditure was $3,713. For COLC and JobSeeker boost, the total is 13,217. That 13,217 figure I gave you is existing customers; new was 13,384.

Ms COOK: So about 26.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Yes, a total of 26,601.

Ms COOK: The DSS does publish quarterly data, and I did pick June 2020 last year, as that was the peak of COVID. South Australia had 112,023 people on JobSeeker. Given we had more than 112,000 South Australians on the JobSeeker payment last June, less than a quarter of them have received the COVID boost payment. Minister, if you are taking any kind of test and you score 25 per cent, is that not a shocking fail?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will just ask Nick Ashley if he can respond.

Mr ASHLEY: The COLC boost was paid per household, so you might have had multiple people in a house who are eligible for JobSeeker, but the house would only receive one payment. So that is why you cannot relate directly the two numbers.

Ms COOK: So at best what would you think that would be then? If you are having multiple people in a household on JobSeeker, at best what percentage is that? If you have people on JobSeeker sharing homes who are individuals with their own budgets who are doing this simply to get along, a paltry 500 bucks is not going to change their world. Were we that bloody-minded that we did not allow individual people who are not even in the same family who are sharing a home or a caravan in order to survive and not sleep in the Parklands—were we preventing them from getting payments?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Mr Chair, I think it is a bit unfair for the member to direct that particular question to a public servant.

Ms COOK: I am sorry. That is to the minister.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We will deal with the eligibility issues and how we went about it.

Mr ASHLEY: I would also just add that, yes, in relation to the difference, to be eligible for the COLC boost you had to live in a house where you were also eligible for COLC, so if you were living with rich parents, etc.—for example, younger people—they would not have got it because their household was not eligible.

The CHAIR: Minister, did you want to respond to the other—

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Sorry. Yes, it is also worth adding that the state government is not the primary government responsible for income support. That is the federal government, quite clearly, and a lot of people who were unemployed last year were very well supported through JobSeeker.

Ms COOK: Going in that direction then, given that the Treasurer recently arranged with the commonwealth to have one application to Centrelink for COVID-19 relief payments, even if the state government was paying the bill in certain regional areas, why did you not ensure that all JobSeeker recipients, even given that they may have been sharing homes—because they are some of the most financially disadvantaged people in our community—were not automatically in receipt of this payment?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: That is a question you would need to put to the Treasurer because we just administer the payment, we do not determine the policy and how it is constructed.

Ms COOK: So, minister, you are telling me you have no responsibility for who receives this particular payment, but you have responsibility for who receives other concession payments?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We administer the payment based on Treasury's advice.

Ms COOK: Did the Department of Human Services know how many South Australians were eligible to receive the COVID-19 boost payment?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We can read the statistics in the ABS, like anybody else, but we do not have access to Centrelink private information. In the first instance, we contact those people who were already in our concession system and I assume that we would have contacted them to say there is a payment available, and certainly we advertised. So we do make contact with people we have access to through our own system, but the commonwealth is very tight with its privacy data. To make any suggestion that they would in any wholesale way provide us with a database that we could then try to contact people with is just not realistic.

Ms COOK: Minister, was there any promotion at all of the extra concession payment availability in Centrelink offices? Did you speak to your federal counterparts to see if they would put that information up where people would be seeking further support via Centrelink?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am not aware whether they did or did not. We certainly used our own channels to communicate with people as much as we could and people usually do find out about these things and figure them out. There is also social media, which is another way that people use to find out matters of this nature.

Ms COOK: Minister, you say that there was advertising in regard to this payment. Do you know exactly how much was spent, on what platforms, how much advertising time and what modelling was done to make sure that you hit the right targets with this advertising campaign? Can you compare that in any way to the current advertising campaign about Building What Matters?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Again, I think it is GCAC—there might have been an internal DHS budget for promoting things. If the honourable member wants to ask any questions about GCAC—I cannot remember what it stands for, but it is the government—again, that would be a question for the Treasurer.

Ms COOK: Minister, have you actually made inquiry at all with your department regarding this level of payment and how few people have got it, or will you commit to investigating why such a small percentage of eligible people did receive this payment, coupled with the fact that there was a $2.7 million underspend as well in the residential rent relief grant scheme, in Budget Paper 3, page 6? Minister, do you consider that your government has failed to adequately support this cohort of vulnerable people throughout the economic challenges of COVID?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Absolutely not. We have done a great deal and I think we have actually had a lot of positive commentary from people about how much we have done, not just through direct payments, which was in addition to the concession payments that were already on offer to this group of people. In addition we provided additional support to services such as FoodBank and the food relief agencies, as well as financial counselling. I think this government has done a tremendous amount of work to assist people who are vulnerable, including those who would not normally have been considered vulnerable, people who are not connected to services who might have been isolating for whatever reason. I think we have done an exceptional job throughout the pandemic.

Ms COOK: How many people on JobSeeker have told your department that you have done a great job?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Mr Chairman, I think that is a rather rhetorical question. It is not like I have sought to—

Ms COOK: But she just said that she has heard from people like this.

Members interjecting:

The CHAIR: Members on both sides, the minister is entitled to be heard in silence in providing her answer.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: How many staff—

Ms COOK: I do not think you need to laugh.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: —are there in Human Services? There are 3,000 people employed by the Department of Human Services. Is the honourable member seriously suggesting that I go and interview each one of them and ask them that question?

Ms COOK: No, but you just claimed that you got feedback.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale!

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: From the community.

Ms COOK: That is no problem.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: From the community.

Ms COOK: Sorry, I was being specific, Chair.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, the minister is providing an answer.

Ms COOK: Thank you, Chair. I was being specific at that point. I am happy to move on.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Member, the minister is still providing her answer.

Ms COOK: I am happy to move on.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: That would be great.

Ms COOK: Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, and I refer to the fifth activity indicating the number of screening applications received. Budget Paper 4, page 88, in relation to these applications, the projected figure for 2020-21 and moving forward, what modelling has led to the figure for this next financial year? Plus, given that for the previous financial year's cohort screening clearances will now last five years, do you consider that 240,000, as a projected figure across this year, may be an overestimation and the government might be overbudgeting in this area?

Mr Whetstone interjecting:

Ms COOK: You hate it, don't you, Tim; you just hate it?

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, that is not necessary. I have received some advice from upstairs in Hansard: if everyone could please talk into the microphones as best as possible, particularly those advisers coming to the table.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will ask Trevor Lovegrove to answer as he is the director of the screening unit.

Mr LOVEGROVE: The question was: is the number that is indicated going forward an accurate projection of what is likely to come in? The projection is based on both what had previously been received and what we predict will occur in the oncoming year. The five-year screening regime will not actually come into effect until probably another two years. There is a rollover period of time, so what will happen this year and next year will still be based on the figures that we currently project coming in because their extended clearance times have not yet started to commence.

Ms COOK: So via the minister to Mr Lovegrove—

Mr WHETSTONE: No, you have to ask the minister.

Ms COOK: Do not stall me, Tim.

The CHAIR: That is not helpful advice from the member for Chaffey—

Ms COOK: No, useless.

The CHAIR: —but I will be providing that advice that the question does need to be directed to the—

Members interjecting:

Mr BROWN: Those days are over, Tim.

The CHAIR: Member for Playford, please. The question does need to be directed to the minister, not to a minister's adviser, Member for Hurtle Vale.

Ms COOK: Was there any anticipated reduction in the drop moving forward? Is there an anticipated reduction of numbers of screening moving forward?

Mr LOVEGROVE: There will be an anticipated drop going forward but not until the end of the current cycle of screenings and when that five-year new cycle commences, which is different for the different screenings that are available because the working with children check came in on 1 July 2019, and the NDIS worker check came in on 1 February this year.

As they cycle through, the three-year previous clearance will come to an end for the people who have those old clearances, and people obtaining the new clearances will then have the five-year period. As people drop off the old clearances, the numbers will come down because people will then have a five-year clearance. However, that is not predicted to start happening until the expiry of people holding current clearances.

Ms COOK: Moving on quickly to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 94, 'Strategies to advance the inclusion of people with a disability'. Have you made a decision regarding the extension of the SATSS program to remove future doubt for users who are currently on the NDIS?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I assume the member is referring to the South Australian Transport Subsidy Scheme. As our colleague the member for Schubert would well know, as this used to be his portfolio, the SATSS has continued while a number of changes have taken place with the NDIS. Indeed, one of the impacts of the collective decision not to proceed with independent assessments means that the transition to a new system is likely to take even longer.

I will just get you a little more detail in relation to SATSS. South Australia has agreed to continue SATSS for NDIS participants until 31 October 2022 to allow time for the NDIA to review its transport arrangements. As I mentioned, independent assessments caused some delays, and COVID-19 delayed development of transport policy decisions. That is a topic of active discussion with the disability reform ministers and we will continue to negotiate for better outcomes for people with disabilities.

Ms COOK: I move on to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 85, which talks about continuing the implementation of Community Connections, with HACC now ceasing and being replaced by this several weeks ago. The Human Services annual report talked about $18.9 million of funding being distributed to service providers through HACC for various services. The Community Connections Program is described in your release as an innovative new program to combat social isolation for socially isolated adults, and it provides age ranges and inclusions for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. What is the total amount of funding allocated for the Community Connections Program in 2021-22?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: This is an interesting program. HACC has been around since Adam was a boy and used to significantly support elderly people living in their own home as well as people with disabilities, but, as I keep saying, service models change over time and funding models change over time. Now we have My Aged Care and the NDIS, so we have pivoted this particular program into a new area. A large portion of it is, as the honourable member identified, isolated adults. We continue to have a strong focus on carers and also providing support to people who are not receiving services through the NDIS or My Aged Care.

Ms BOSWELL: As people have transferred out of the Home and Community Care, we have been moving people through support to both My Aged Care, to get the supports that they need going forward, and the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and therefore there is a step down to $15.7 million. That has allowed us to repurpose money towards some Community Connections money for children as well, so there is an additional $1 million, as the minister said in her opening statement, that went into programs associated with country services for Safer Families, and we are also providing Community Connections approaches in Tiraapendi Wodli and some other programs.

There is money in the budget going forward for the Community Passenger Network, the Community Connections care partners approach, Community Connections community partners approach, which includes carers and Aboriginal organisations in particular, coordinating partners, including capacity building, multicultural and regional coordinating partners, and other programs that will be going forward.

This program now has been designed in conjunction with The Australian Alliance for Social Enterprise, which has worked with the department to come up with a program that looks at social isolation and how to bring people who have been involved traditionally in HACC, not because they needed specific supports that are now provided under NDIS or under My Aged Care but because they actually needed a way to be connected back into community and to get supports.

This program seeks to do what the National Disability Insurance Scheme does in many ways, which is to get people to participate in their community rather than just get services going to them. We are trying to bring people into connections.

Ms COOK: I understand time has gone, Chair. In regard to tabling questions, I have some questions to table on notice.

The CHAIR: They do not get tabled. They get submitted through a process. I can provide you with the email address.

Ms COOK: But I can do that later today?

The CHAIR: Yes, at any point immediately preceding today's—

Ms COOK: Thank you to department staff.

The CHAIR: Given the time has expired for examination of payments in relation to the Department of Human Services portfolio, if there are no further questions, I declare the examination of the portfolio Department of Human Services completed.

Departmental Advisers:

Ms L. Boswell, Chief Executive, Department of Human Services.

Mr N. Ashley, Chief Financial Officer, Finance and Business Services, Department of Human Services.

Mr J. Young, Executive Director, Disability Services, Department of Human Services.

Ms K. Biggins, Acting Executive Director, Community Investment and Support, Department of Human Services.

Ms K. Brandon, Director, Access and Inclusion, Strategic Policy and Reform, Department of Human Services.

Ms M. Kirkby, Director, Accommodation Services, Disability Services, Department of Human Services.

Mr. T. Lovegrove, Director, Screening Unit, Community Investment and Support, Department of Human Services.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We now welcome Mr Joe Young, executive director of Disability Services; Ms Muriel Kirkby, director, Accommodation Services in Disability Services; and Ms Ksharmra Brandon, who is the director of access and inclusion, strategic policy and reform.

The CHAIR: The next session will examine proposed payments in relation to Disability Services. The minister appearing is the Minister for Human Services. The estimates of payments again relate to the Department of Human Services and also Administered Items for the Department of Human Services. I advise that the proposed payments remain open for examination and invite the minister to make an opening statement in regard to this portfolio, should she wish.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The Marshall Liberal government continues to drive the economic and social benefits of a more inclusive South Australia. One year on from the launch of Inclusive SA, South Australia's first disability inclusion plan, South Australian government agencies and local councils are committed to improving access and inclusion for people living with disability through the implementation and release of their Disability Access and Inclusion Plan.

On 18 February 2021, I released the first annual report of Inclusive SA, providing an update on progress and achievements to date of Inclusive SA actions and the work of state authorities in removing the barriers faced by people living with disability to enable all South Australians to fully participate in our society.

In the first 12 months of operation, the state government has launched the Inclusive SA website, launched the South Australian Public Sector Disability Employment Strategy, completed the redevelopment of the Supreme Court complex to include accessible amenities, lifts, ramps, spatial designs, way finding signage and hearing loops as part of the Higher Courts Redevelopment Project and released the inclusive play guidelines.

Following the release of the Safeguarding Taskforce report in June 2020, the statement has now finalised all seven recommendations. These initiatives have demonstrated the Marshall Liberal government's commitment to safeguarding South Australians with a disability.

In the 2021-22 state budget, the government announced funding of $500,000 towards the development of a safeguarding smartphone app that will improve the accessibility for people living with disability to connect with existing safeguarding agencies. This app, to be developed with people with a disability, the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission and others, will also include a virtual visit function that complements and enhances the existing Community Visitor Scheme.

To ensure this important work continues, I am pleased to report the continuation of funding for the access and inclusion directorate within DHS. The functions of this directorate include the strategic leadership, management and expert advice to inform the national disability agenda, including the NDIS and the National Disability Strategy.

In May 2021, the South Australian parliament passed amendments to the Disability Inclusion Act to provide stronger safeguards against the unauthorised use of restrictive practices for NDIS participants. The new laws support the use of appropriately measured and ethical practices to support people with disability and ensure that restrictive practices are only used as a last resort. The new laws bring South Australia into line with other states and territories to have a streamlined authorisation process covering all NDIS participants, which is enshrined in legislation and consistent with the national principles regarding restrictive practices.

The public consultation on the draft regulations closed on 2 July. This process has informed the drafting of guidelines that will also be subject to further consultation. As part of the South Australian government's strategy to transition out of state Disability Services and support the NDIS model of choice and control, a competitive market process was undertaken to transfer the Domiciliary Equipment Service Readily Available Loan Equipment Service to the non-government sector. ALTER, which is part of Cabrini Health, commenced a contract to supply refurbished and readily available loan equipment through to DHS equipment program clients from 14 December 2020.

Throughout this transition, continuity of service was maintained for all client cohorts. The DHS equipment program continues to support and fund South Australians who are otherwise ineligible for equipment and home modifications through the national aged and disability schemes. Accommodation services continue to provide support services to approximately 530 clients in the community and at Northgate Aged Care. Improvements and reforms continued in DHS accommodation services to continuously improve the quality of services provided and operate effectively under the NDIS. This has included:

recruitment and training of new disability support workers;

commencement of the NDIS quality audit; and

review of key systems and processes.

Service reforms to broaden operations as a registered NDIS provider will continue to be a priority in 2021-22, with full transition required by mid-2023.

The traineeship program announced in last year's budget has also commenced, providing the opportunity for 175 trainees of any age to become fully qualified disability support officers and gain ongoing government employment at the end of their traineeship or to explore opportunities in the growing market. With over 730 applications for the 60 positions that have already secured a highly sought after role, this has been a great initiative. I am very proud to be the minister in this area and of all the work that has been done in the last 12 months to support people with disability to live their best lives.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, do you wish to make an opening statement?

Ms COOK: Thank you to the department staff for their hard work and attendance.

The CHAIR: Very good.

Ms COOK: I refer to Sub-program 4.2: Accommodation Services, which is in Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 96. Minister, who is responsible for the governance, safety, clinical standards and oversight of the unit at Hampstead that has been designed to facilitate NDIS participants leaving hospital?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The honourable member is referring to the transition to home program. In March 2020, the Department of Human Services, Wellbeing SA, the NDIA and local hospital networks developed and implemented the transition to home step-down program as part of South Australia's existing long stay transition to discharge project. The transition to home program facilitates the timely discharge of people with disability from hospital into the community and was successfully accelerated as part of the COVID-19 response.

The program currently operates from Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre, with 23 places available. When transition to home reaches capacity a waiting list is maintained and admission is managed based on individual needs and the vacancy available. For example, an individual who has been on the waiting list the longest is not necessarily the next admitted, they may require a single room which might not be available. The program also operated from U City, which closed in November 2020. DHS continues to work with SA Health and Wellbeing SA to support people who may be eligible for the program. I am not sure if that has answered the honourable member's question.

Ms COOK: In short, is it true to say that the Department of Human Services is responsible for the governance, safety, clinical standards and oversight of that unit?

MS BOSWELL: The transition to home unit is actually a community house. The department is responsible for it, as it is for any group homes. When you say 'clinical governance' it makes it sounds like a health model; it is not a health model. It is a disability group home in many respects.

Ms COOK: Given that statement and my question—

Mr Whetstone interjecting:

Ms COOK: Tim, you really are frustrated, aren't you?

The CHAIR: Members, it is unhelpful for members on both sides of the chamber to make commentary to each other.

Ms COOK: Given that statement, given my question and given the fact that a man recently was transferred from that unit to the hospital after a first visit from an external provider found a festering wound weeping pus that has made the gentleman so unwell that he spent weeks in hospital, is the model not correct if you do not understand what clinical standards are? Should the person have been there, given how unwell he was? If you do not have staff able to recognise deteriorating wellbeing and health, then should you review how that unit is set up?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will ask the CE to respond to this, but I might also say that there is a lot of speculation in the honourable member's commentary, which is not helpful.

MS BOSWELL: There are a number of statements that were made that are not accurate in terms of our understanding of those facts. The matter is under investigation by the Health and Community Services Complaints Commissioner. We take any concerns about the welfare and safety of our clients very seriously. We look forward to the outcome of that investigation and do our utmost to ensure that all recommendations are followed and any matters that need addressing are addressed.

Ms COOK: I refer to Sub-program 4.2: Accommodation Services. Can the minister give an update on the current advanced manual handling training that has taken place? Is best practice being implemented as part of this?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: There has been a lot of reform in the accommodation services space, and I think we need to commend the teams of staff who work there—the on-ground staff management and the leadership of the department—for the excellent work they have undertaken to ensure that our services are providing quality services, including engaging with clients with lived experience.

In terms of manual handling training, the advice I have received is that DHS accommodation services provides advanced manual handling for all new employees entering the service since 2018. This training has been provided by a trained physiotherapist and specialist in manual handling. Existing staff receive training in intermediate manual handling every two years as part of their compliance training requirements.

In response to the changing profile of clients, that is, clients are ageing and therefore less mobile, and to support continuous improvement, in mid-2020 accommodation services updated compliance training requirements to include advanced manual handling training. In sites where specific needs had been identified compliance training in advanced manual handling training was brought forward outside the regular training cycle.

Ms COOK: Is this training all in person, face-to-face, with practical skills assessed?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: That is a very detailed question, so that is something which we might invite Ms Boswell to answer.

MS BOSWELL: Yes, although that may have varied during COVID. I might need to check that, but the advanced manual handling training—

Ms COOK: I am happy for you to take it on notice. I refer to Sub-program 4.2: Accommodation Services, Volume 3, page 96. I am aware that the minister has previously taken umbrage at the naming of a victim of improper manual handling. With this in mind, I will refer to that person as DP, and I am sure your department will assist if you cannot remember the case.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I remember it very well.

Ms COOK: Very good. Is the minister able to update us regarding any developments around the specific case and the investigation into the passing of DP? Do you know what is the progress with respect to the Coroner investigating this? Can you advise, minister, also, in regard to the staff member alleged to have used the inappropriate manual handling technique whether their employment was terminated by the department or did they resign?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The honourable member might use an acronym, but she was the one who put this person's name and face in the media in what I regard as one of the most disgraceful acts of an opposition in my time in government, against the wishes of the family who, from my conversations with them, thought she might have been an investigator. She should hang her head in shame—

Ms COOK: I can give you the recording actually.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: —at her behaviour—

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, the minister is entitled to answer as she wishes.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: —in relation to this particular case. She has disgusted members of the disability community, and demonstrated a fairly advanced form of ableism throughout that whole episode. In relation to her specific questions, it is a matter before the Coroner and I cannot comment any further.

Ms COOK: Minister, last year in estimates we were advised that the staff member no longer worked for the department—that is on record here in this house. Was that staff member the subject of a termination of employment?

Ms BOSWELL: I do not believe that was said in estimates last year.

Ms COOK: I will provide it if need be.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: In any case we are not going to comment any further on the outcome of those investigations. The honourable member claims—she has a face mask that says 'unions' on it, yet she is more than happy to attack people in the frontline.

Ms COOK: A union does not protect incompetence, particularly if the department is in charge of the lack of supervision.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, the minister is entitled to be heard in silence when she provides her answer.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Without knowing all the facts of a case, she is quite happy to go out there and cause lots of distress. There were media cameras staked outside that home, so there are innocent parties who also suffered some trauma because of the member for Hurtle Vale's behaviour in taking this case to the media in such a disgraceful way. She might want to bear in mind that some of the members of the unions that she associates with might have been impacted by her very actions. Just think about what you wish for really.

Ms COOK: Bearing in mind that a union is not a method to shield staff who do not follow orders, or people who are the subject of inadequate training and supervision, can the minister guarantee—

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Point of order.

Ms COOK: I did not say it was about you.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am not talking about myself. I am talking about this particular case.

Ms COOK: I am about to refer it.

The CHAIR: Members! The minister is entitled to raise a point of order; she has done so.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I would ask the honourable member to not try to place unverified commentary, that she may have heard or may have made up, on the record.

Ms COOK: What is your point of order? You have just accused me of being some union shield. You are very inconsistent.

The CHAIR: There is no—

Mr BROWN: Don't be embarrassed!

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am not embarrassed.

The CHAIR: Please, enough!

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Aren't you union?

The CHAIR: Members, enough! Proceed with the next question please, member for Hurtle Vale.

Ms COOK: Thank you. I refer to Subprogram 4.2: Accommodation Services. Can the minister guarantee that all shifts are being covered in all supported disability accommodation as required?

Mr Whetstone interjecting:

The CHAIR: The member for Chaffey will cease interjecting. Member for Hurtle Vale, could you please repeat the question through the Chair?

Ms COOK: Thank you, I will. Can the minister guarantee that all shifts are being covered in all supported disability accommodation, as required?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will ask Joe Young if he could respond to this particular question.

Mr YOUNG: There are quite a number of shifts in one day where there are roster vacancies or people calling in sick or for whatever reason. There is a process that our daily replacement office goes through. Some of those are filled through people who have available time, overtime and also agencies. Where a shift is not able to be covered by an agency, there is a local arrangement that is put in place between particular clients' houses, in terms of the services being provided and also to ensure our obligations under SafeWork, etc., are covered through floating staff and those things.

Ms COOK: Can the minister advise how many hospital presentations have been required as a result of lack of supervision in a unit such as—I will use the first initial of the unit. I believe you should be able to identify it: it is C street. I do this so that I do not identify the street. I am happy to tell it in confidence.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I thank the honourable member for treating this matter confidentially. If she wishes to proceed to ask about the details—

Ms COOK: Yes.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: —I will attempt to get some information for her in relation to those particular complaints.

Ms COOK: In regard to this particular house, and perhaps others, how many staff should be present for a morning routine were the house to have four significantly vision-impaired residents who have complex cognitive and other needs, with at least one of those requiring two-person assist for all movement?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think it is a bit of a hypothetical question in terms of the level of need. I am not sure whether in disability there is a scoring system as there is in aged care. The RTS, or whatever it is called these days, is supposed to translate into some form of staffing rosters. I think in disability there is a greater range of diversity, but I might ask Muriel Kirkby if she wants to respond.

Ms KIRKBY: Yes, all our homes have gone through a clinical review in terms of the needs of our clients. That has been carried out by our director of nursing, so there is a high level of clinical oversight in terms of what the client needs are. We review that regularly as needs change.

Ms COOK: How many staff, not trainees, have been employed in the past 12 months in supported disability accommodation? We are aware of the trainee program. In that trainee program, if staff were placed in a supported disability accommodation how were they identified and interviewed for a particular site?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: It is probably just worth bearing in mind in relation to the trainee program that they are actually supernumerary. I answered a question the other day that said there has been something like a 13 per cent turnover of staff in accommodation services, so we have probably employed to replace at the moment, or as the number of clients increases then, 120 new employees since January.

Ms COOK: I am taking a cough lolly, not sweets, Mr Chair.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Have you been tested?

Ms COOK: Yes, I have been tested for COVID, thank you. Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 96. I refer again to Sub-program 4.2: Accommodation Services. In the accommodation services over recent years there is a case where 'Mitchell' was referred to. I am understanding that this is not Mitchell's name. I am aware of the circumstances. Also, I will refer to the names of the relatives using the names used in the royal commission. Minister, why did you refuse to meet with Mitchell's relatives, Victoria and James? How did you respond to their request personally for a meeting?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: This matter was under investigation with the Ombudsman, and we received advice that while it was under investigation with the Ombudsman I should not meet with the family. That was their advice. I have subsequently written to the relatives to invite them to meet with me.

Ms COOK: So you have signed off on a letter yourself inviting them for a meeting. Continuing on the same line for a little while: given that statement before, is it standard for responses to be actioned by your office after a request for a meeting only once the Premier has been contacted?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: No.

Ms COOK: Did you ever prior to the royal commission yourself in writing or otherwise ever reach out to this family?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I would have to go and check through our records. I think my office has had contact with them, but that sort of detail—because the matter took place in 2018, so that is three years' worth, so I might need to take that one on notice and get back.

Ms COOK: There was a letter sent to this family. Did the department draft that letter? Did you see that letter at all prior to it going out?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: So this is a letter from the department to the family?

Ms COOK: I do not know; you tell me.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I do not know—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: If I do not know—

Ms COOK: You can laugh. It is serious.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, please. We have broached this a number of times this morning.

Ms COOK: I do not think they need to laugh, sir.

The CHAIR: When the minister is providing an answer, she is entitled to be heard in silence. That applies to my left and to my right.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: It is a bit difficult if the honourable member does not identify whether it is a letter that I signed or whether the department signed. There has been a lot of correspondence with this family.

Ms COOK: On what basis did the department form a view that there was a thorough investigation by both the department and the police, and has the department actually corrected this information about the alleged thoroughness of the investigation to the minister?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Thank you to the honourable member. I should actually say at the outset that, yes, when I did see that letter that was sent to the family, it is an awful, awful letter, and I can completely understand the distress it has caused. It was something that was brought to my attention by the former Principal Community Visitor, Mr Corcoran, late in 2018—so sometime after it had taken place. My recollection of this matter is that I had been assured that it was a thorough investigation. I have since asked that the department reinvestigate this matter as well. I will invite the CE if she wants to make any additional points in relation to this particular situation.

Ms BOSWELL: I note that the matter was referred to the police repeatedly and investigated by the department's investigation unit, which has been led by police officers. They formed a view about what they could do within the bounds of their remit, given that the view was this should be a police matter. In terms of the investigation, as a matter of course during the royal commission, there were concerns that should have gone further and the Ombudsman said it should have gone further.

There has been further interviewing of people and I have since hired an external investigator, who is seeking to investigate the matter further. Unfortunately, it will be difficult, as it has always been, to establish the author of an anonymous letter. The matter has been referred to the police on two occasions.

Ms COOK: Minister, are you aware the family were provided with an apology, which they did not receive, got locked in an email that they did not use for several months and there was no follow-up in that period of time until royal commission evidence was submitted to say that this family had not been reached out to by the department? Is it good enough that this type of butt-covering exercise happens just before the royal commission happens and there is no follow-up with the family to see whether they had a response to the initial reaching out to them; is that good enough?

Mr KNOLL: Point of order, Mr Chair.

The CHAIR: Point of order.

Mr KNOLL: Given that I understand the rules of question time and the standing orders remain in place for this committee hearing, that question offends standing order 98 quite substantially and I would ask you to rule it out of order.

Ms COOK: How so?

Mr KNOLL: It contains argument.

Ms COOK: No, it is fact out of the royal commission. It is on fact, and I am sure that the department would agree to that.

Mr KNOLL: Actually, sorry, Chair, to interrupt, but can I extend my point of order and suggest that—

The CHAIR: There is no—

Mr KNOLL: —questions actually cannot contain fact or argument.

Members interjecting:

The CHAIR: Members, I am going to give the minister an opportunity to respond, to correct the record, if she feels the need.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I might invite the chief executive to respond in relation to some of those details.

Ms BOSWELL: I wrote a letter of apology at the request of the Ombudsman. At the time, I do not believe we were even aware that this would be a matter before the royal commission. The letter was sent to the same email address as the letter they did receive only a couple of days before from the head of the investigations unit. I can only assume that the family just overlooked that particular email. It was the primary email address on our contact list for the family and was used for another email, as I said, that they did receive within a very short period of time.

The first I became aware that the family had not received that was when I read the evidence that was presented to the royal commission. I was horrified and immediately sought Crown advice because we were in the middle of the royal commission and I did not want to disrespect the royal commission by doing something during a hearing process. Once that was received, we immediately made contact and made sure that the family received it in another way.

Ms COOK: Have there been any further incidents recently regarding the care of Mitchell that have warranted investigation?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think it is inappropriate to discuss client matters.

Ms COOK: Will the minister release the agenda for meetings held between the Principal Community Visitor since 2019 and either the minister and/or the CE of DHS for publication prior to the Principal Community Visitor annual report that flagged this incident regarding Mitchell that had all this investigation occur? Will you release the agendas for the meetings to demonstrate that you were not, or your department was not, flagged regarding this issue with Mitchell before?

Ms BOSWELL: The department was aware. The matter happened in I think it was either the end of February or early March 2018. The department was aware and immediately commenced an investigation. Safety standards were put in place for Mitchell the day the letter was achieved. There were many conversations between the director of the incident management unit and the family and a lot of support was put around it. As you will be aware, there was a state election in March 2018. As far as I understand, it was not brought to the attention of the minister either by ourselves or by the community visitor until she received the draft report.

Ms COOK: Again, minister, you would be familiar with the case of Daniel, that was also brought to the forefront in the royal commission, regarding the theft and non-permission for the purchasing of certain personal items, linen and clothing. Do you have any concerns regarding the running of the department in this respect? What direction have you seen put in place to prevent this from happening to anybody else?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I thank the honourable member for her question and as I said, I think at the outset, there has been a great deal of work done in terms of accommodation services to ensure that the service is much more responsive to clients in the service and that we are providing a much higher quality service to our residents. Clearly, that particular incident demonstrated a poor practice. We think that a lot of the practices within the accommodation services have improved vastly, and there is quite a list of reforms that have taken place to make sure that our people are given the dignity, respect and care they need.

It has also been reported to our service that in the past families used to 'pick their battles', whereas now they believe that they can safely report things to the service and those matters will be responded to. I will provide a comprehensive response to the honourable member. The reforms that have taken place within the accommodation service include:

establishing a zero tolerance to abuse and neglect strategy as part of a new practice quality and safeguarding framework;

increased education for staff on how to recognise and report suspected abuse or neglect;

commencing a pilot of the use of CCTV in the homes of people living with disability;

lowering the threshold for critical client incidents so that more incidents are reported and immediately identified and treated as critical;

introducing a customer charter to clearly define the service's commitment to customers;

establishing a customer group to self-advocate for a greater voice in their support and access to the community;

restructuring the service to increase supervision in group homes to provide better management and mentoring of frontline support workers; and

establishing a new quality and practice portfolio to deliver improvements in service delivery to customers.

Ms COOK: Minister, how many people living in disability accommodation have died since March 2018?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am not sure we have that statistic with us.

Ms COOK: I am happy for it to be on notice.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: On average, there are probably about 20 people who pass away per annum. It is important to bear in mind that some of these people have spent significant time living in institutions prior to being in accommodation services, and they could have significant physical limitations that are not necessarily conducive to a long life. It is very important that we all get exercise and live a healthy lifestyle but that can be quite challenging if you have any mobility limitations.

Ms COOK: In regard to critical incidents that have taken place in accommodation services over the past three years, are you able to guarantee that every one of these incidents has been fully investigated and nobody in accommodation services would have passed away due to a lack of care or clinical oversight?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: A natural death is not a critical incident.

Ms COOK: No.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Critical incidents relate to a whole range of things, including quality of care. As I said, we lowered the threshold to include things such as if a staff member grabbed a client—that can be a critical incident even if there is no actual injury to the person. We have a very robust critical incident policy that we continue to work on. It is something that is a constant work in progress to make sure that we are improving our services. The department takes its approach to critical incidents very seriously, but deaths from natural causes are not part of that.

Ms COOK: If someone is so very unwell that they arrive at the hospital from your accommodation services, are placed in an induced coma and put on a breathing machine, is it ever—

Mr KNOLL: Point of order.

Ms COOK: For goodness sake, just lay off!

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, that is not helpful. A point of order has been raised. Members are perfectly entitled to do that.

Mr KNOLL: The start of the question contained the word 'if' and the question in its subsequent composition is hypothetical and therefore out of order.

Ms COOK: No, it speaks directly to—

Mr BROWN: Point of order, Mr Chairman.

The CHAIR: Member for Playford, please.

Mr BROWN: As a former minister, he should know this, but we are actually in the committee stage of a bill, not question time, so the rules are different.

The CHAIR: That is true. There is much wider scope for questions during the committee stage. I am happy for the question to be put. Members should remember that while the member is able to put the question in a much more open way the minister is entitled to respond how she wishes.

Ms COOK: If someone is so unwell that they arrive at hospital and are placed in an induced coma on a breathing machine, is it ever an appropriate thing to delay calling a family member to be with this resident due to it being late at night?

Ms BOSWELL: We do have an expectation that families are informed when someone goes to hospital. That is a requirement, and if that does not occur we do investigate those matters. As well as that, if someone arrived at a hospital in that situation you would expect that hospital may also be required to notify.

In answer to the member's previous question, we also have a mortality review committee within the department that looks at every death, regardless of whether or not it could be by natural causes, just to ensure that we do pick up any concerns along the way, and of course in certain circumstances deaths are mandatorily notified to the Coroner.

Ms COOK: Yes, I am aware of that, thank you. There was a lot of evidence given in the recent royal commission, and a lot of questions were asked in regard to processes within Disability SA. Evidence was given by one of the area supervisors who had direct contact with a couple of the incidents that were under investigation. I will respect the person's name and not reveal the whole name, although it is public. It is Mr C.

Has the minister been briefed regarding the evidence provided by this supervisor, and would she believe that it is an honest and true precis, bearing in mind that we have an excerpt from a message regarding this area manager's promotion dated 13 November 2019, post the incident, about this man, saying:

One of the very well-known staff in our service, Wayne started his career with IDSC in 1988. He has most recently acted as Area Manager in the southern area where he has been working with staff to improve services for the people we support. Wayne has a wealth of experience in NDIS implementation and has also been the Accommodation Services Manager at Cheltenham. Wayne has an admirable work ethic, always putting the people we support first, and was a nominee for a 2019 DHS Chief Executive's Award.

Further; Mr [C] was a finalist for the Premier's Excellence Awards on Tuesday 6 April 2021 to acknowledge individuals and teams who have consistently demonstrated exemplary service delivery and the South Australian public sector values.

Given the incidents that had occurred across a period of time and the lack of this person's capacity to detect this air of neglect within these services, which was quoted also by one of your senior managers in the royal commission, do you stand by these statements and these nominations of this staff member within your department and do you feel concerned that there may be other people who are equally as incapable of providing supervision and care to people?

The CHAIR: I have provided a fairly long leash this morning to you, member for Hurtle Vale. I will remind you that in ordinary circumstances that question definitely would be out of order. I am going to give the minister an opportunity to respond to the question, but please keep in mind my generosity may not extend into the next session.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I would also like to point out that I have been very generous in not having any Dorothy Dixers so far.

Ms COOK: You have; thank you.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will invite the chief executive to respond on this one.

Ms BOSWELL: Mr C is a very capable and very genuine and caring employee who is actually extraordinarily good at his job. I stand by that nomination. I think that there are matters before the royal commission and the royal commission evidence that we cannot currently go into.

The CHAIR: The time allocated to the examination of payments in regard to the portfolio of Disability Services has expired. Therefore, there are no further questions and I declare the examination of the portfolio of Disability Services completed.

Sitting suspended from 10:46 to 11:00.

Membership:

Ms Michaels substituted for Ms Hildyard.

The CHAIR: Welcome back to Estimates Committee B. The portfolio open for examination during this session is Volunteer Services. The minister appearing is the Minister for Human Services. The estimate of payments relate again to the Department of Human Services and Administered Items for the Department of Human Services. I advise that the proposed payments remain open for examination and I call on the minister to make an opening statement in regard to this portfolio, should she wish.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I do not think we have any new advisers to introduce you to; you have met them before. Volunteering is an important part of sustaining an inclusive society in which all South Australians have the opportunity for meaningful participation. Volunteering connects us, strengthens our sense of belonging and creates positive relationships that build stronger and vibrant communities. In South Australia hundreds of thousands of people engage in formal and informal volunteering every year with a diverse range of volunteer-involving organisations. Their volunteering efforts contribute directly to the health and wellbeing of individuals, to our communities and to the economy of our state.

To build a stronger volunteering sector, in May we launched the new Volunteering Strategy for South Australia 2021-2027, which was developed by the South Australian government in partnership with Volunteering SA&NT, Business SA and the Local Government Association of South Australia. The strategy was developed in consultation with over 600 people from across business and the not-for-profit sector. The new strategy builds on the foundation created by the state's previous strategy from 2014 to 2020.

The key priority areas of the strategy are increasing the participation of young people, building the capacity of organisations to upskill and retain volunteers, and helping more people to enjoy the rewarding experience of giving their time. The strategy will be supported through action plans which will be reviewed every two years and which are designed to be flexible and responsive to feedback and changing priorities or circumstances within the sector. A recent workshop with approximately 75 delegates from across local and interstate government, business and the not-for-profit sector identified key actions for the first plan. I am pleased to share some of the achievements of the first strategy, which include:

development of tools and resources to encourage youth volunteering guided by a student volunteering working group;

development and promotion of online resources to help volunteer organisations understand work health and safety laws related to volunteer activity;

development and implementation of the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment volunteer guidelines and online training module to ensure a consistent approach to management of volunteers in the Public Service;

establishment of an ongoing public sector volunteer policy network to support the effectiveness and experience of volunteers for Public Service agencies. The network has been meeting quarterly since 2017 and is represented by over 15 government agencies; and

establishment of a working group to work with the volunteering sector to determine how best to manage volunteer disputes, including better access to training and relevant resources to support volunteer management.

Some actions that are being progressed currently with our partners include: development of a pilot project, volunteering as a pathway to an apprenticeship or traineeship, in collaboration with the Department for Innovation and Skills; continued support for the WeDo app, an online resource for recording and individual's volunteer hours and recognising their volunteering contribution, especially for young people; and piloting a new connector model to focus on connecting young people to volunteering opportunities and building capacity of organisations to engage young people in appropriate and meaningful volunteering roles.

To formally acknowledge the contributions made by so many volunteers and volunteering organisations, the state government delivers a number of initiatives to recognise and support volunteers, including the volunteer certificate recognition program and the annual Volunteers Day celebration event, including the presentation of the South Australian Volunteer Awards.

This year's award recipients were Mrs Betty Khor for the Joy Noble Medal; SULLIVAN Consulting for the Premier's Award for Corporate Social Responsibility; Habitat for Humanity—South Australia's Bushfire Recovery Program for The Andamooka Community Project Award; and Ms Victoria Gautier, who is the volunteer manager of Carers and Disability Link, for The Excellence in Volunteer Management Award.

Our initiative to provide free volunteer screening has saved volunteering organisations more than $8 million since it was introduced in 2018. With the outbreak of COVID-19, many volunteer-reliant charities and organisations have found it challenging to maintain their workforce. Despite the disruption caused by the pandemic, we continue to support them through an active partnership.

I would also like to acknowledge the significant contribution of Evelyn O'Loughlin, who is moving on to new challenges after almost 13 years at the helm of Volunteering SA&NT. I am sure everybody wishes Evelyn all the best for her future and thanks her for her service, particularly through partnerships and a range of initiatives that she has been involved in.

The CHAIR: Lead Speaker for the opposition, did you wish to make an opening statement?

Ms COOK: No, only again to thank the service of the volunteers of South Australia during a difficult time, particularly the service of Evelyn O'Loughlin, who has been instrumental in building the volunteer workforce, so to speak, throughout the state.

The CHAIR: At the conclusion of opening statements, I call for questions. The member for Hurtle Vale.

Ms COOK: I am referring to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 85, pretty much for all parts of the questioning; it is regarding building capacity of volunteers. Within the Community Connections Program, the release from the government talks about how this program will help independence, isolation, and all of those things, but also opportunities to volunteer and learn new skills within the program. With regard to the Community Connections Program and volunteers, how many people within that new program will the minister consider meeting the criteria of isolation? What is that definition of isolation, and how will these volunteers assist with that?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will have a go, and then I might see if someone from the department would like to speak to more detail about the way we are designing the program. I think we have seen in the community that there has been quite an acknowledgement and recognition that there are isolated people. Off the top of my head, things that I can think of are The Pear cafe, which I think is in Woodville, Croydon, or around there somewhere. There is a recognition of community programs which are supporting people who are isolated through the community awards. I think one of their newer awards, from memory, is focused on that particular area.

I mentioned previously that through COVID we came to appreciate there were a number of people who were impacted by COVID who might not actually be connected to the formal service network. One of the examples that springs to mind is somebody in the member for MacKillop's electorate, who I think was a lady in her early 60s who chose to self-isolate because she was concerned at the start of the pandemic.

We have some people who have been COVID impacted who might otherwise not need assistance to get about living their daily lives. I think we personally all know of individuals who can be on their own and not interact much with people, so certainly we are seeking to target a range of those people. I am not sure whether there is any sort of measurement of people who are isolated, but I might see whether one of our officers would like to expand on what is the concept behind this particular program.

Ms BOSWELL: The role of community coordinators and coordinating partners in the program is to identify need in the community. Because this program is trying to develop a new approach to social isolation and identifying it, we are trying not to be too prescriptive about the definition of social isolation, because to do so might rule out people who need supports. It is about identifying need and identifying how you can connect people into new opportunities.

Obviously, there are limited resources, so people will not be serving everybody, regardless of need. With coordinating partners, we have a great deal of respect for our non-government partners in this in that they have quite a lot of expertise in their communities and in where need arises. We are developing reporting and evaluation mechanisms as we go so that we can refine how this program goes forward. It is very much a try, test, learn approach to the Community Connections process.

Ms COOK: There has been a focus on the term 'social isolation' during the preamble to the rollout, and the rollout I understand commenced on 1 June. You talk about development of the program. I understand evaluation might lead to changes within a program, but is this program not fully developed already when you hit go on it and hit stop on HACC?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Someone will correct me if I am wrong but, as the CE has already said, it is try, test, learn. We have a large number of partners and through this process we are not trying to dictate to them what their program might look like, but harvest the diversity of their experience and opportunity and their own volunteer cohorts to make sure it is as rich as possible going forward. I think there is the continued support for carers through this process, and they are very well established in what they do. That program complements what the commonwealth has been doing in the carer space, but I will see if anybody wants to expand on that.

Ms BOSWELL: We certainly still have the Community Passenger Network, the Carer Connect. There is a lot of the Carer Connect process in this approach, which is still doing many of the things that were done under the old HACC program for carers in particular, expanding that and trying to complement the new commonwealth government approach to carers. We had long conversations with the carer associations about that and have developed it to be complementary.

In terms of identifying need in the community, we are working closely, in partnership with the non-government organisations, with those people and their communities who understand and know where their social isolation issues are. We are talking about groups of non-government organisations that have been dealing in concepts of social isolation for many years, so you do not want to set something that says that you need to have not spoken to somebody for X number of years to be able to be considered to have social isolation.

You need to not have many community connections, you need to be in need of some social connection, and they are working at identifying those needs and identifying the pathways through to better programs. Volunteering may well be one of those in terms of taking somebody into a community centre and having them connect into those sorts of organisations.

We are seeing some very good models of that type of work, for example—and this sits outside Community Connections—Tiraapendi Wodli in Port Adelaide is very much bringing in people and channelling them into meaningful volunteering, and hopefully as a pathway to meaningful work, to get them out of social isolation and other community disconnection issues.

Ms COOK: To be clear, there is no specific definition being used—I think you have clarified that there is not. Is there any rubric that is in place for the community partners to now be able to assess people in the community and slot them in to ensure that there is fairness exercised and that people who require assistance do not miss out? Is there a rubric that is being applied to this—any scientific, qualitative—

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Excuse my ignorance, but what does 'rubric' mean?

Ms COOK: It is a template that you would use to check off whether or not something has been achieved in order for it to be contained within a certain program.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: So you are talking about having to assess people before they can get on a community bus and that sort of thing?

Ms COOK: To be qualified for a program, as such, you often have to meet certain criteria. Is there a rubric being applied to this particular program that would capture all the people who have required assistance, to make sure that they do not miss out?

Ms BOSWELL: There has been quite a lot of work to ensure that everybody on the old HACC program is being transitioned appropriately, and that work is continuing to make sure that they are, in particular, maximising their approaches to My Aged Care and the NDIS. Most people who require that sort of personal assistance and regular domestic support-style arrangements therefore do qualify for NDIS and My Aged Care, which in fact probably will give them better and more personalised approaches than the old HACC program.

HACC was often self-assessed in the local community by whoever was delivering HACC in terms of who had the greatest need. That approach continues but with an emphasis on connecting people rather than just delivering services to them on a daily basis. So it is about getting them to be involved in things to bring them into community and have them engaged and hopefully to be able to deliver a better life within their local community, rather than just have somebody come to deliver a service, which, when we went out and consulted and looked at programs, seems to contribute to social isolation rather than improve it.

Whilst there is not a strict definition of social isolation—the old HACC program did not have a strict definition either—this is actually about identifying local need in local communities and understanding who in that community has need. We have quite a bit of faith in our non-government partners to be appropriately distributing that resource. They tend to try to go with the highest need first.

Ms COOK: Talking a little bit more about Volunteer Services, we know that during COVID there has been a huge drop in the numbers of volunteers, for good reason. With the instability currently around COVID, obviously that recovery is going to be even more difficult than anticipated. The budget paper outlines the strategies to increase volunteers, including grant programs.

Which grants specifically target volunteering and all volunteering organisations to be able to rebuild their capacity, given that the structure of grants has changed? Arts and environmental organisations, for example, do not necessarily meet the criteria around vulnerability. What sorts of grants can they access to build their volunteering capacity and return their volunteering workforce?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think there are probably two levels of support. There are the organisations that support volunteer organisations—obviously, one of those is Volunteering SA&NT—and then we also have other organisations, such as Northern Volunteering and Southern Volunteering, that also provide support. I think there is one on the Limestone Coast—

Ms COOK: No, they have closed.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: There may be others. There are several levels to it. There is support for the volunteering organisations themselves that we understand broadly provide support, some capacity building, a range of things, and the amount of funding which is going out to those particular organisations is more substantial than in the past.

I note that the commonwealth, through its programs, actually doubled that funding in this current financial year. In addition, the Department of Human Services is also providing funding to those supportive organisations, if you like. So they obviously assist organisations, particularly some of the smaller ones, with some of their policy development and a range of things. In terms of direct support to organisations, the Grants SA stream provided COVID support through the grants round last year.

Any organisations that might be outside that Grants SA remit can certainly access assistance via Volunteering SA&NT and the like. I think it has always been a policy of government that sporting organisations receive funding from sports and so forth so that we can ensure that our Grants SA program is focused on the other community groups so that we do not get too much mix-up, but there is some creep within different parts of the sector from time to time.

Ms COOK: What is the total FTE in the department responsible for the delivery and implementation of the volunteering strategy?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: In terms of for the strategy itself, it is 1.5 FTE. Obviously, there are other programs which have an intersection with volunteers, such as the grants program, which directly benefit volunteers, and I do not think we could quantify across the department what the equivalent FTE is that supports volunteering in South Australia. As I am just reminded, there is a partnership with the LGA and Business SA which provides its own level of support in those areas as well.

Ms COOK: Will the current level of staffing within the department be maintained for the duration of the next 12 months?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Yes.

Ms COOK: In respect to grants, you spoke about that just before, regarding grants that intersect with volunteering. There is about $3 million, I understand, that was allocated from that Charitable and Social Welfare Fund. Of course, many of those grants go specifically to organisations around volunteering, which is very important. Where is the remaining money allocated in that fund?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The Community Development Fund, is that—

Ms COOK: No, the Charitable and Social Welfare Fund.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Yes, that is the hypothecated thing. I will ask Nick Ashley if he can provide some detail about the funding through that program.

Mr ASHLEY: You are correct that there is an annual allocation of $3 million. It did change from year to year.

The CHAIR: Mr Ashley, you are allowed to take your mask off for this.

Mr ASHLEY: There is an annual allocation of $3 million, and of course the spend from year to year does change, depending on the focus. If you are referring specifically to last year, obviously the focus in 2021 was COVID, so there was about $1.8 million of grants specifically in response to COVID-19 in the COVID rounds.

In terms of the main focus of other areas of spend you are right: it gives, I think, some highlights. An amount of $843,000 went towards Good Shepherd microfinance to support ethical microfinance products. There was funding provided to Second Chances SA, in terms of their prisoners' kids and family care team, of $172,000. There was some place-based community wellbeing partnership funding with the Fay Fuller Foundation of $150,000.

There was then a range—I do not have the total number but quite a large number—of grants provided to community centres to help enhance their user experience. They were given individual grants of up to $7,000. It looks like we have probably handed out maybe 20 or 30 of them. We also supported some youth-led COVID-19 grants as well.

Ms COOK: So I take it then that you are satisfied, minister, that the legislated amount of moneys has been allocated from that fund in the last 12 months?

Mr ASHLEY: Yes, the social welfare fund is an administered item within DHS accounts. As such, we have the annual amount of $3 million. Anything that does not get spent is always subject to a year-in carryover process and approved and goes into the following allocation, so we always end up spending the full amount.

Ms COOK: The last grant round that was submitted and applied for ended in around February or thereabouts, I believe. When will you be distributing that money?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think I might have referred to that in one of my opening statements.

Ms COOK: Yes, just to confirm, thanks.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think they might be in my in-tray at the moment, actually. The 23^rd of April is when it closed. It has 'urgent' on it, and if I was not here, I would be signing it right now.

Ms COOK: Very good. Thank you for that response. On the same lines, I am talking about the coordinating of this volunteering strategy and my questions relate to the pilot project, which the minister has confirmed to me in writing about, that will fund Northern Volunteering SA and Southern Volunteering SA and, sadly, Limestone Coast has had to close so they are not privy to any of this support. That is to support increased volunteering opportunities for young people. Minister, did you initiate this pilot program for youth volunteering and where did that money come from? What was the process of arriving at this sum of money for each of these organisations?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I might ask Katherine Hawkins if she would like to respond to this particular question.

Ms HAWKINS: We recognise that there is an opportunity for us to further support young people in particular with regard to the volunteering sector. It also meets a need in our Youth Action plan, as you would probably be aware. We had a number of conversations with Southern and Northern Volunteering, which have been volunteer resource centres that we have had a longstanding relationship with. They were very keen to be part of a new pilot initiative to better support the engagement of young people in volunteering opportunities, both in the south and the north.

The allocation of funds of an additional $75,000 for this financial year will go towards them engaging with VIOs in the southern and northern region. That reallocation of budget comes from our training grants line and we thought this was the best utilisation of the funding this financial year. I should also add that as this is a pilot we will obviously work very closely with Southern and Northern Volunteering over the next 11 months or so to monitor the outcomes of that to determine what the future of volunteering is going forward, especially in relation to the changing landscape of the commonwealth funding.

Ms COOK: In respect to this commonwealth funding, minister, have you made representation to your federal counterpart, because youth as a specific cohort is actually not represented in the new VMA funding arrangements? Given that you have acknowledged that there is a gap in the area and you are funding youth as a specific cohort, what about the other areas that miss out because of the new VMA federal arrangement, such as older people? Have you made representation and why would you not also look at making sure that they are targeted?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I thought you might ask your question about what conversations I have had with the commonwealth and I was trying to remember and I did not have a chance to check the correspondence. It might have been changes to the carers funding or changes to the volunteering funding that I specifically wrote to Minister Ruston about, and I cannot remember which one it was, so I might need to get back to you about that.

We do have regular contact with the commonwealth, of course. My understanding of what they are seeking to do, which they have done as a national decision, is to reduce the number of organisations that they specifically fund, not reduce the total amount of money, but that the services should be—obviously, Volunteering SA&NT was the successful recipient of that funding and my understanding is that they have been negotiating with Northern and Southern Volunteering and those agreements have been reached. We are satisfied that the volunteering sector is working well together, and we have been putting in additional funding to assist them.

The CHAIR: With that answer, the time allocated for the examination of payments in relation to the portfolio of Volunteer Services has expired; therefore there are no further questions, and I declare the examination of the portfolio of Volunteer Services complete.

Ms COOK: I will do omnibus in youth, by the way, just so everyone knows and does not get anxious about it.

Departmental Advisers:

Mr M. Buchan, Chief Executive, SA Housing Authority.

Mr N. Symons, Chief Financial Officer, SA Housing Authority.

Ms B. Hollsworth, Executive Director, Strategy and Governance, SA Housing Authority.

The CHAIR: The next session for Estimates Committee B is in relation to the portfolios of the SA Housing Authority and affordable housing. The minister appearing is the Minister for Human Services. The estimate of payments are as identified earlier and I advise that those proposed payments remain open for examination. Minister, would you like to make an opening statement and introduce your advisers for us.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I will introduce the staff that we have here from the South Australian Housing Authority. The chief executive is Mr Michael Buchan. We also have Belinda Hollsworth and Nicholas Symons.

Over the last 12 months, the Marshall Liberal government, through the South Australian Housing Authority, has made significant progress in delivering the housing and homelessness support strategy, Our Housing Future 2020 to 2030, reaching a number of milestones. We have introduced a number of new and innovative measures to address key housing-related issues, trying to think outside the square and look at national and global learnings to find ways to improve housing and homelessness responses in South Australia.

Most importantly, we are delivering real outcomes for our most vulnerable and existing tenants and low to moderate income South Australians. I am pleased to say that the Marshall Liberal government is supporting jobs and local businesses while we are increasing affordable housing opportunities. We have provided a $21.4 million housing stimulus package to build 100 new homes, and I am delighted to announce that earlier this month all 100 homes have been built and sold. Seventy-one of these were sold as affordable homes, enabling buyers with moderate incomes, including first-home buyers, to get a foot in the door of home ownership in good suburban locations without having to compete with investors.

We are continuing to support the local economy for jobs for South Australians as we progress with our $400 million commitment to deliver 1,000 new affordable homes by 2025, which is well underway. To ensure we are able to effectively connect low to moderate income South Australians with the increased supply of affordable housing, in February this year we launched HomeSeeker SA, which is an innovative website to help South Australians get into and maintain secure long-term housing.

The HomeSeeker website is a one-stop shop providing links to services and information to assist people, including homebuyers, to understand their housing options. Affordable homes are exclusively available to eligible buyers so that they do not need to compete with investors and are available from $250,000, with more than 50 homes and blocks of land currently for sale. HomeSeeker will be an integral part of our affordable housing strategy moving forward as hundreds more homes become available, and I am very pleased that South Australians are getting behind this resource to get into their homes.

We have also invested in apprenticeships in housing-related jobs. The $400 million affordable homes commitment coincides with a new $5 million apprenticeships pilot program offering 250 social housing customers, women and Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander people, housing trade apprenticeships. The program will help reduce trade skills shortages by providing $5,000 per year for each apprenticeship over four years, and apprentices will work on building sites, including government projects. As part of the state's 10-year housing strategy, the authority has committed to delivering up to 1,000 employment and training outcomes targeted to social housing customers, including people on the housing register.

We are also proud of the amount of funding in the maintenance and upgrades of our public housing. As we know, when we came to government our public housing system was in ruins. The former Labor government routinely cut housing maintenance as a budget savings measure, leaving a maintenance backlog in the hundreds of millions of dollars. This government has taken a very different approach.

Mr BROWN: Stock numbers up or down?

The CHAIR: Member for Playford!

Mr BROWN: Are they up or down?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Do you want the answer on what happened on your watch?

Mr Brown interjecting:

The CHAIR: Member for Playford!

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: It is all there; it is all there on record.

Mr Brown interjecting:

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: They are one-quarter of what you did, one-quarter—

Mr Brown interjecting:

The CHAIR: Member for Playford!

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: —which your Treasurer put in the forward estimates—

The CHAIR: Minister!

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: —and we have reduced that to one-quarter of what you were selling.

Mr Brown interjecting:

The CHAIR: Minister and member, enough!

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The Marshall government has taken a very different approach.

The CHAIR: Minister, if you could just hold on for a second. This is not going to happen today where we will have interjections throughout this session. Members who are involved in the process will do so respectfully, waiting for the call should you wish to ask a question.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Through various programs, we focus on preventative maintenance and upgrades, including to walk-up flat properties, which were in significant need of work. We have upgraded nearly 500 aged public housing properties through the $21.1 million preventative maintenance and upgrade program, well above our original target of 450 properties. This includes three walk-up flat sites, 255 individual properties and 39 properties on Kangaroo Island.

We have made significant progress in 2021 with our $75 million capital maintenance program, with interior and exterior upgrades to South Australian Housing Authority properties across the state. We have fast-tracked refurbishment and renovation works to 1,400 public housing properties by bringing forward $10 million of the $75 million capital maintenance program, whilst also providing an immediate economic stimulus in the COVID-19 environment.

Upgrades include security and energy efficiency improvements, kitchen and bathroom renovations, and relocations of laundries into individual properties for greater convenience for tenants. These upgrades were undertaken to improve amenity and extend the life of public housing properties, and they provided a further boost to the local building and maintenance industries.

The Marshall Liberal government is committed to reducing homelessness in South Australia. People with lived experience told us that the homelessness system was difficult to navigate and they were not getting the right support at the right time. Homelessness service providers and international experts told us there was a better way to organise and deliver services. We have listened to them and we have unashamedly undertaken the nation-leading reform necessary to support South Australia's most vulnerable.

The new homelessness alliances commenced operating on 1 July, reforming the homelessness services system in a way that better meets the needs of our state's most vulnerable and makes it easier to access support. The four regional alliances were selected through a comprehensive tender process, along with a statewide domestic and family violence alliance.

The alliances will provide services to address the complex and evolving needs of clients experiencing or at risk of homelessness across South Australia. The new model promotes collaboration between government and the housing and homelessness sector, linking services together and combining experience, skills, resources and specialist services to improve client outcomes.

A key focus is on early intervention and prevention to stop people falling into and repeatedly cycling through the homelessness system. Client transition has been a priority, with the South Australian Housing Authority working with all providers to support the transition. A number of agreements have been reached with some of the unsuccessful organisations to support the shift to the new model, and I have received reports that clients have been well supported through this process.

In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have responded swiftly to accommodate people experiencing homelessness, particularly rough sleepers. During the most recent seven-day lockdown, we provided short-term hotel/motel accommodation for people experiencing homelessness and domestic and family violence to ensure they were able to comply with SA Health directions during the lockdown.

In the lead-up to and during this lockdown, there has been a high level of coordination undertaken with and between the newly operating homelessness alliances. The alliances have provided valuable wraparound supports to people in emergency accommodation during this time, helping our most vulnerable to stay safe. Support will continue through normal services, and the Housing Authority will work with the alliances to provide assistance to those ready to engage with services to help them into the most appropriate housing outcome.

We know that not all clients have the skills to be successful in independent housing, and that is why we have launched a new program with SA Health to provide specialist accommodation to help South Australians who have experienced extended periods of rough sleeping due to complex needs and behaviours. The new program is delivering safe, short-term accommodation with 24/7 onsite support aimed at helping clients transition into and maintain longer term housing.

In May this year, we launch the state's first standalone South Australian Aboriginal Housing Authority to be delivered over the next 10 years. The Aboriginal Housing Strategy sits alongside Our Housing Future, and we will leverage its commitments to ensure that the interests of Aboriginal people in South Australia are met. Following extensive consultation undertaken with Aboriginal communities across the state, the Aboriginal Housing Strategy has been informed by Aboriginal voices and represents the needs and aspirations of Aboriginal South Australians.

The Aboriginal Housing Strategy includes solutions to improve housing outcomes for Aboriginal people across the full housing continuum from crisis services through to affordable housing and home ownership opportunities. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Aboriginal advisory committee, the South Australian Housing Trust Board and members of Aboriginal communities, who have generously shared their time, knowledge and lived experience to develop it.

The CHAIR: Lead speaker for the opposition, did you wish to make an opening statement?

Ms COOK: No, thank you. I will go straight to questions. I refer to Budget Paper 3, page 76, Neighbourhood Renewal Initiative. I refer to table 5, capital investment programs. Can the minister advise specifically how many Housing SA properties originally existed in the Felixstow Renewal SA site and what percentage is being developed in the current proposal under that project?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I thank the honourable member for her question. We have the Neighbourhood Renewal Initiative, which includes Felixstow, Blair Athol, Woodville Gardens and Seaton. The total inputs from that is 101 properties. It will result in 146 social housing outcomes. In addition, there will be 268 affordable housing outcomes and, on top of that, market sales of 223, so that will be a total of 637. So the inputs go from 101 to 146. In relation to Felixstow, that is land that was vacant—I am advised the properties were demolished in the order of five years ago—and that will result in 25 new social housing properties.

Ms COOK: Prior to demolishing that property, which was not actually five years ago—it was a bit less than that, I think—how many public housing properties were there on there?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I do not have that information. It probably took place before I was minister so I do not have that information.

Ms COOK: Is the calculation of increase or decrease or whatever in terms of this renewal project predicated on the fact that there are zero public housing properties on there and you completely disregard the fact that there were dozens and dozens of public housing properties on that block of land before?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: That your government demolished?

Ms COOK: That is not the question.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Well, that is the answer.

Ms COOK: Okay, fine.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, the minister—

Members interjecting:

Ms COOK: Seriously, all of you, one, two, three crows, you are a joke. Just quieten down and let me ask questions. You are disrespectful.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, that is out of order.

Ms COOK: And this is not? The guffawing and the laughter is not?

The CHAIR: Excuse me, there were noises coming from both sides of the chamber. The minister is entitled to answer the question as she sees fit without interruption.

Ms COOK: That is fine, I will move on. No problems. Minister, are the numbers of social housing public housing properties now fewer than they were in March 2018?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I do love it when you guys ask me these questions.

Mr WHETSTONE: Star Chamber.

Ms COOK: What are you?

The CHAIR: Member for Chaffey!

Ms COOK: What are you?

The CHAIR: The member for Hurtle Vale will not respond to comments. The member for Chaffey will not make interjections.

Ms COOK: Such an uneducated rabble.

Mr WHETSTONE: Sticks and stones.

Ms COOK: Mate, you need to cut it out.

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale!

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will ask the CE if he could respond to this. I will also see if I have any information which is outside the budget things because I do like to carry some of these things with me at all times.

Mr BUCHAN: Unfortunately, we do not have the numbers with us at the moment. They are publicly available in our annual reports. What we do have is the asset movement that has taken place over the previous 12 months. What we have in that situation at the moment is an adjustment of asset in total of 411 properties during the financial year. So the closing balance of social housing at the end of this particular reporting period is 33,726 and it has reduced by 411. Sorry, that is public housing. That figure that I have just referred to is related to public housing, the stock that we own and manage ourselves. The reduction of some 411 properties has taken place in the following sort of simple breakdown.

Approximately 300 properties have been transferred to the community housing sector during the period. We had another 130 or 140 properties that were sold during the period as part of the development programs that we have running and also to deal with some of the viability sales that remain within the budget process.

For the net adjustment, we can provide the sort of detailed breakdown to each one of these different levels, but these were offset to a large extent by the 170 new properties that have been constructed as well as 30 properties that have come from the community housing sector back to the Housing Authority as part of broader renewal programs where assets are exchanged back and forth between the community housing sector and the public housing sector more broadly.

Ms COOK: Continuing, with money getting brought forward in the budget, what happens in future years when that money has already been spent?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Sorry, I do not think I understand the question.

Ms COOK: If you bring money forward from forward estimates, which you talk about—you have brought money forward—what happens in the future when you need money to spend, when you have already taken the money out of the forward estimates and brought it forward for spending now?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: It depends on the program. It is such a large organisation that there is a lot of money that goes in and out. For example, with the affordable homes program that I talked about in my opening statement, there is a lot of money that comes into the organisation as well, which I think we estimated at the start of the process we had netted out at the end. There is a lot of money that goes in and out of the organisation. We can talk to some more specific details if you want to ask a more specific question.

Ms COOK: With respect to maintenance backlog or liability, what was that when you were elected and what is it today?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I have spoken about this before. I have probably bored your Legislative Council colleagues endlessly about some of the things that I have repeated because I think they do bear repeating. I think it was the Auditor-General who belled the cat in, it might have been, 2017. It estimated that there was up to $700 million of maintenance liability under the former Labor government.

We have obviously had the asset inspection program and, in the meantime, we have also been working through a range of upgrades to properties by bringing forward maintenance spend because there were quite a lot of properties that really needed to have works done to them, which included kitchens and the like, as well as things that are much more urgent, such as replacing a roof. Sorry, what was your question?

Ms COOK: What are the numbers? You can put a number on money and numbers of backlog and liability, which gets applied in the department. What was it when you took government compared to what it is now?

Mr BUCHAN: The question of liability associated with public housing is to some degree very difficult to answer on its face because it calls into question the nature of the asset strategy that is going to be deployed for the management of those assets. What we have done is work through an evaluation of all of the stock that we have within our portfolio, taking into consideration the renewal programs that we have been running over the last couple of years, dealing with the specifics associated with the individual maintenance liabilities that are in place with each of the individual dwellings.

The asset inspection process undertook an evaluation of around about 30,000 properties. The 30,000 properties were then rated against a standard of being really good down to poor, and each of the individual attributes in all of those properties were evaluated by, essentially, an independent expert, a consultant who went through and did that work.

They then provided a report back to us, looking at each of the individual properties. They considered any emergency or urgent maintenance that needed to be undertaken immediately, and that was undertaken during the course of the evaluation. Essentially, as they went to a property, if they saw something in the property that they wanted us to deal with immediately, we got on with dealing with that immediately. We spent in the order of $4.7 million to undertake that immediate maintenance over the last couple of years, as the properties have been identified.

We have now completed the evaluation of the entire portfolio. What they have provided us with is essentially a ranking of our entire stock portfolio in terms of its suitability, where it fits in terms of those accommodation standards, from good through to poor. What we have done now is create an assessment of that, which takes into consideration a couple of things: just undertaking an audit, looking at what needs to be spent on all of those properties to bring them up to a standard that we are comfortable with to extend the life of the property, etc.

We are also looking at that through a second process, which is that there are some properties where the maintenance liability does not justify the capital spend, so we would sell those properties and use the funds that we generate from that to invest in new properties. The current estimate that we are operating with internally is approximately $300 million in terms of a full book of maintenance.

However, we will probably manage the way that is spent by essentially making decisions about some properties that we would not undertake maintenance on; we will trade our way out of it, remove the liability from the public housing system and use the proceeds from that to acquire new properties.

As members probably are aware, much of the stock is ageing now. Commonly, the value in the public housing system is in the land held within some of those houses, because the houses are not providing the utility. The income that would be generated from those sales would be reinvested in replacing the stock that is lost through that process.

We are really interested in having a far more dynamic asset management plan. So rather than assuming that we are going to maintain and hold the existing portfolio as is, in its existing style, we would assess that against what the customer need is, because obviously the customer need has changed over the period, with far more complex clients, often needing more robust housing that is also more accessible, and therefore have a much greater accessibility for more customers as part of our process.

With all those things it is difficult to sit and say that there is a fixed liability of a certain amount, but rather we have an assessment of our existing asset portfolios which says that we could spend the following amount on these properties. We need to offset that against our longer term asset strategy plan: where do we need assets, who do we need to house as part of that process and what is the appropriate typology of those properties.

Ms COOK: On notice, can you provide a breakdown and reconcile the original and current number?

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, I just make clear that the minister decides whether a question is taken on notice; you do not provide that direction to her.

Ms COOK: Minister, can you provide evidence of that reconciliation of the difference? I recall in opposition you talked $400 million, now we are hearing $300 million. How has that occurred? Are you able to provide a reconciled breakdown to show the difference between what your numbers were and what they are now?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think the $700,000 was independently done, so that was an estimate perform based on a sample of stock. It is not actually comparing apples with apples in some ways. The other factor is that it is a portfolio of 33,000 to 34,000 properties: some are no longer there, some are new, it is quite a moving feast.

Ms COOK: I refer to Budget Paper 3, page 79. You talked about ceilings needing to be fixed. Can you advise whether there is a plan to replace ceilings in public housing in Hectorville, and will the residents of Hectorville in this particular area be told details, or are you working on an assumption that they might catch some information in the public sphere?

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, page 79 is the contents page.

Ms COOK: Expenditure line for public housing, capital maintenance.

The CHAIR: Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 79?

Ms COOK: Budget Paper 3, page 79—sorry, 4.3 it would be.

The CHAIR: Page 79 is the contents page.

Ms COOK: Sorry, my apologies, I will find it, no problem at all.

Mr WHETSTONE: Uh-oh!

Ms COOK: Oh, don't be stupid—you are ridiculous. You do not have a diagnosed Tourette's issue—you need to stop making noises.

The CHAIR: The member has an opportunity to correctly reference her question.

Ms COOK: At page 79, it would be Budget Paper 3, the Budget Statement. We are talking about maintenance within there.

The CHAIR: Budget Paper 3—there is the confusion.

Ms COOK: Budget Paper 3, page 79.

The CHAIR: Correct. You originally said Budget Paper 4, Volume 3.

Ms COOK: I do not believe I did, but anyway, no problem.

The CHAIR: Quite okay, continue.

Ms COOK: Uh-oh!

Mr WHETSTONE: You are a class act.

Ms COOK: Oh, mate!

The CHAIR: Please, members, it is not necessary to interject.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We do, from memory, have properties at Hectorville. The framing of the honourable member's question makes it sound like there is a particular program in Hectorville. My understanding of any of the issues in terms of maintenance would be that it would be on a case-by-case basis, unless these were the ones where they had the wrong ceiling plasterboard installed. I am advised that if it is a matter of the ceiling needing to be replaced then the ceiling needs to be replaced, but we can try to get some more information. I am sure that, if there is an issue, the regional office specific to Hectorville will be able to advise us.

Ms COOK: When you do, can you advise how many residents are impacted, what formal notification they received regarding impact and how that decision for the work was made? I will provide you with a little bit more of a question: why was the Levi Caravan Park suggested for these residents to move into? They were asked to pack up all their gear to be ready to move out in the middle of winter during the pandemic in order to have this work done but were not provided with any formal information about when that would be or how long that would take. They just had to sit on their belongings, all packed up and ready to go. Is that appropriate?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am not aware of what the honourable member is talking about, but we will certainly contact the local office and see what information we can find.

Ms COOK: Okay, thank you. I refer to Budget Paper 3, page 79 again, regarding the statement that SAHA provides social housing options and homelessness services. In regard to the early intervention fund, can the minister advise how much of the budget has now been allocated and distributed to non-government organisations that were successful in the first round and whether or not all those projects will be completed?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: As part of Our Housing Future 2020-2030, a $20 million fund was established to trial new responses that shift the emphasis towards stopping people from entering homelessness and breaking cycles of homelessness, rather than focusing on responses to crisis events. The first round that was allocated was $6 million.

Following a competitive tender process, the proposal submitted by Kids Under Cover for the installation of studios to prevent youth homelessness was awarded funding of $2.4 million. Kids Under Cover build one or two-bedroom studios with a bathroom in the backyards of homes to assist carers in need of more room to accommodate young people in their care. The studios provide a stable space for a young person to grow and study while keeping them connected to their family and reducing the risk of them being forced to leave home prematurely.

The South Australian Housing Authority is currently exploring options for the allocation of the remaining funds and looks forward to offering further opportunities to support further homelessness prevention in the near future.

Ms COOK: What happened to the funding committed to UnitingCare Wesley Bowden, Junction and Kornar Winmil Yunti?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: UCWB, Junction Australia and KWY have formally withdrawn their submission from the Homelessness Prevention Fund.

Ms COOK: Minister, was this as a result of the reforms in the homelessness sector, and what have you done to reallocate that funding so that people who are homeless can benefit from it, given that there was a $20 million pool announced well over a year ago and there is now only $2 million or thereabouts allocated?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: 2.4.

Ms COOK: Sorry, 2.4.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: It was their decision. I am not aware what the reasons for it were, because it was their decision to do so.

Ms COOK: Sorry, the rest of the question: what have you done to reallocate that money?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We will be looking forward to doing a new announcement in the future.

Ms COOK: To be clear, the $20 million pool of money is available and set aside, is it, within the budget?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Correct.

Ms COOK: If I could just pop back to the ceilings—page 79 in Budget Paper 3. I am advised that your CEO signed a letter to these tenants.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am sure he signs a lot of letters. I am not sure whether he uses an electronic signature or not. I will indicate for the record that he is nodding. We have undertaken that we will get further information on that particular issue.

Ms COOK: Thank you very much. Same line, same paper. Minister, how many of the units that were left vacant because of the premature movement of people out of their properties at Hove have been retenanted since the decision was made to not build the Hove overpass?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: In terms of the Hove residents, I am advised that all of the tenants who were at the Hove site have been contacted and offered the opportunity to return to their old property. My advice is that all seven relocated tenants have elected not to return—to stay in their new property—and two of the seven remaining Hove tenants are still taking up the option to relocate. It seems that Hove is not the place to be anymore. In the meantime, the vacant properties will have some minor vacancy maintenance completed before being reoffered to tenants—so a bit of a spruce up before we have new tenants in, if you like.

Ms COOK: Has any work at all been done on the Hove site since the tenants have moved out?

Mr BUCHAN: At this point in time we have not started maintenance on the properties, because it is at a group site. What we wanted to do is establish what the movement from the tenants was, because we were keen to ensure that the tenants had the choice in terms of returning to the property or not. We have confirmation in terms of the tenants who do not want to, obviously, return. We also have confirmation that additional tenants wish to leave. Because of the nature of the property what we would like to do is wait for that movement of tenants to finalise so we can come in as part of one action and essentially undertake the maintenance across all of the vacant properties so that we minimise the disruption for the existing tenants who are staying.

Ms COOK: In respect of the same budget paper, the money you have allocated and spoken about regarding the $75 million where $10 million was brought forward, how much of the maintenance money, including your $130 million per year, has been spent in the past 12 months? How much in total?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Are you asking how much of the—

Ms COOK: Total. All of it.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: —standard annual maintenance budget for 2020-21? Is that the question?

Ms COOK: Yes, all up, what has been spent out of all of those buckets?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Oh gosh, how long is a piece of string?

Mr BUCHAN: The expenditure of maintenance this year has been accelerated broadly for a number of reasons. Obviously, as part of a stimulus measure for the sector, we started the program but also to ensure that we were starting to address the asset condition that was being identified as part of the backlog maintenance survey that we had undertaken. So the expenditure—and these figures are yet to be finalised, because we have not completed our financial statements, so they are estimate at this stage.

In the annual program we have spent approximately $101.3 million in recurrent and $13.9 million in capital, making a total $115.2 million. We have then gone on to spend an additional capital maintenance—so this is the accelerated money, when you talk to the $75 million, which was brought forward. At this stage, we estimate we have spent in the order of $9.6 million during the period.

The housing stimulus expenditure during the period, which was referred to being fully expended previously, involves two parts: one was walk-up flats, and we have spent approximately $7 million, and housing stimulus preventative maintenance, which was the 450 properties that we were targeting working on, was $10.4 million. We also went and upgraded the Holbrooks facility, which is a facility that has been developed as part of the new homelessness initiative, which we are working on with Health to provide an outcome for people who are leaving.

Quite often, it was learning out of the CEARS program, where we had people who fell into homelessness who went in and we captured and put in hotel/motel who then went back into homelessness as part of the exit out of the COVID lockdown the first time around. We identified that we needed some specialist accommodation that we wanted to trial to ensure that people were able to stay within the housing system. As a result of that, we spent approximately half a million dollars with a capital upgrade for independent living at Holbrooks.

In total, of those one-off programs, we spent approximately $27.5 million, with the total maintenance spend for the period being $142.7 million.

Ms COOK: Budget Paper 3, page 79 still, but moving on to more of the homelessness issues. Minister, with regard to the current people sleeping rough in the CBD, those numbers are published usually around the middle of the month on the Zero Project dashboard. Why are they not there for the 30 June end of month?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am not sure I can answer that because we do not run that project, it is independently managed. They are not published by the South Australian Housing Authority, although the South Australian Housing Authority would participate in some of the strategic management groups. I am just trying to think of what their governance structure is. I thought it had shifted to the University of SA. The University of South Australia is providing the backbone and there are a number of committees or steering groups and those sorts of things associated with the Adelaide Zero Project, but the government does not publish those figures—that is a matter for them.

Ms COOK: In respect to the transition to the alliance model, can the minister advise if the new south CBD alliance is fully staffed and delivering a full suite of programs now that the other previous programs have been completed at the end of June?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: My understanding is they are still recruiting for some positions. I think we need to take our hat off to people working in the homelessness sector, particularly last year but also through the most recent lockdown. They swung into action at pretty short notice and did an amazing job of providing services to people who were experiencing homelessness. We are really proud of the fact that we have managed to provide support services into the current hotel program for quite a significant number of people, and those people continue to be supported at the moment. Our goal is to assist them into more permanent situations.

Ms COOK: Has anybody at all put representation to you to express concern regarding the short transition time for changeover between one to another methodology, particularly in the south CBD area because of the fact that there was such a big upheaval?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Are you talking now about the COVID situation or are you talking about switch to the alliance?

Ms COOK: The latter.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think there had been some concerns in the sector about the magnitude of the changes to what we were doing. I think, all things considered, it has actually gone very smoothly. I am not, of course, in direct day-to-day contact with providers but they know how to find me if they want to tell me anything, particularly Ian Cox, who is well known to a lot of people, who runs the office of homelessness reform and who has been in regular contact with a range of providers throughout the process to support them, as has the team that works with him within SAHA.

It is worth remembering that there were transition plans that were put in place. As part of the tender, all the proponents were required to submit transition plans. At contract award, transition commenced well ahead of 1 July, with regular meetings with outgoing and incoming service providers in constructive handover meetings. Minimal service transition was required for the other alliances, that being country north and country south, with the exception of an assertive outreach service for the Riverland, Adelaide north and the domestic and family violence alliance.

The Adelaide south region has undergone substantial transition of services, with various arrangements in place to mitigate risk, including the subcontracting of some existing providers to ensure continuity of services for clients during the transition period. The Toward Home Alliance efficiently progressed their recruitment and training processes, which has positioned them well, and I am advised that all services are operational.

Ms COOK: Did the transition plan include not being fully operational a month after starting?

The CHAIR: Member for Hurtle Vale, with the conclusion of that answer the time for examination of payments in relation to the portfolios of Housing Authority and affordable housing has expired; therefore, there are no further questions. Other avenues are available to the member should she wish to submit them. I declare the examination of the portfolios of Housing Authority and affordable housing completed.

Membership:

Ms Hildyard substituted for Mr Brown.

Ms Wortley substituted for Ms Michaels.

Departmental Advisers:

Ms L. Boswell, Chief Executive, Department of Human Services.

Mr N. Ashley, Chief Financial Officer, Finance and Business Services, Department of Human Services.

Ms K. Biggins, Acting Executive Director, Community Investment and Support, Department of Human Services.

Ms S. Vas Dev, Director, Office for Women, Community and Family Services, Department of Human Services.

The CHAIR: The next session is for 30 minutes and will examine the proposed payments in relation to the portfolio of the Office for Women. The minister appearing is the Minister for Human Services. The estimate of payments and administered items are as referred to earlier for the Department of Human Services. I advise that the proposed payments remain open for examination and I call on the minister to make an opening statement in regard to this portfolio, should she wish, and to introduce her advisers.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Thank you, Mr Chairman. We have met a number of the officers before. We have a new addition, Sanjugta Vas Dev, who is the Director of the Office for Women, Community and Family Services.

The past year and a half has been challenging for us all; however, for some one of the effects of staying at home—isolation, job loss and uncertainty—was an increased risk of domestic and family violence. During the height of the pandemic, South Australia saw an increase in contacts with domestic violence services of up to 50 per cent, an increase in demand for emergency placements of up to 66 per cent, and an increase in requests for specialist service support.

This increase in contacts and demand was experienced throughout Australia and has been reflected in multiple studies by organisations such as the Australian National Research Organisation for Women's Safety (ANROWS) and the Australian Institute of Criminology. In response to the increased demand for services, the Australian government provided funding to all jurisdictions to boost domestic and family violence responses under the National Partnership on COVID-19 Domestic and Family Violence Responses.

South Australia was provided with approximately $9.7 million in funding over the 2019-20 and 2020-21 financial years to respond to this crisis. Allocation of the national funding during 2021 has included continuation of individual safety and support packages, which increase the safety of women by providing them with funds to support them and their children to escape violence by allowing immediate expenses to be paid and immediate needs to be fulfilled.

The national funding has also included provision of specialist financial planning and counselling programs to women who have escaped, or are escaping, domestic violence. These programs support women to become financially independent and empowered to meet their own financial needs.

The funding has also allowed fast-tracking of the establishment of additional safety hubs in regional South Australia and communities and continuation of perpetrator interventions, including Don't Become That Man and interventions through the Youth Justice KIND program, which have provided early intervention for people concerned about their use of abusive behaviours or those people who have not yet been in contact with the criminal justice system.

Also funded are additional rounds of the Break the Cycle campaign, raising awareness of domestic, family and sexual violence throughout South Australia; the establishment of the safe and secure housing program, supporting victims of domestic, family and sexual violence to find mid to long-term housing and exit crisis accommodation; and the establishment of the Safe and Well kids program to support children and young people experiencing domestic and family violence through trauma-informed counselling and case management.

The funding also includes development of a trauma-responsive case management model designed specifically for Aboriginal children experiencing domestic and family violence and funding for the Parklands response for Aboriginal women and children experiencing domestic, family and sexual violence and sleeping rough in the Parklands, providing passage to secure accommodation or return to their home country, if that is preferred and it is safe.

Alongside the initiatives funded under the national partnership, we continue to make significant progress towards priorities set out in the national plan to reduce domestic and family violence against women and their children, with South Australia committing to and progressing 17 initiatives across the five national priority areas outlined in the fourth action plan. The initiatives under the fourth action plan of the national plan committed to by South Australia include establishing safety hubs, developing a statewide perpetrator response and delivering the Workplace Equality and Respect project, which was successfully finalised in 2020-21.

Throughout 2021, we have focused on implementing early intervention initiatives with perpetrators of domestic, family and sexual violence, and actioning commitments in Committed to Safety, the South Australian government's framework for addressing domestic, family and sexual violence. We have committed $400,000 per year to the Statewide Perpetrator Response, which has been allocated to No to Violence after an extensive tender process.

A specialised telephone service commencing on 1 July 2021 offers confidential assistance and referral pathways for perpetrators of domestic and family violence, advice and workforce development opportunities for frontline workers, improved connections and information sharing between services and information referral options for relatives, friends and victims.

The Marshall Liberal government is committed to investing in continuing valuable services that have been established in South Australia, with an additional $500,000 to continue the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme in an ongoing capacity and $100,000 to continue the successful personal protection app provided to women at high risk of experiencing domestic and family violence.

In 2021-22, the government will launch the women's leadership and economic security strategy. The effect of the pandemic has meant this strategy has a stronger focus on women's economic security and financial wellbeing. Employment is a key factor in building economic security for women. It is important to recognise and address the effect of the pandemic on women's employment in South Australia.

The South Australian female unemployment rate peaked at 9 per cent in June 2020. Since that time, the rate of unemployment has decreased to 5.7 per cent, with a corresponding increase in the female labour force participation rate and rates of underemployment for women in South Australia outperforming the national female underemployment recovery.

As part of the consultation and development of the strategy, in March this year the Office for Women hosted a leadership and economic status round table to help further inform the framework, which will empower women to fully participate in our community and economy. I look forward to releasing this strategy soon and continuing to work with our business and non-government sectors to deliver meaningful change for not just women but all South Australians.

The CHAIR: I assume the lead speaker for the opposition is the member for Reynell. Do you wish to make an opening statement?

Ms HILDYARD: No.

The CHAIR: There being no opening statement from the lead speaker, I call for questions.

Ms HILDYARD: Thank you, Chair. I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 90. Why is there a 21 per cent decrease in expenditure on staffing from last year to this year?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: It is to do with the national partnership. I will ask the acting director to respond.

Ms VAS DEV: In response to your question, the FTE decrease between the 2020-21 budget and the 2021-22 budget is mainly due to time-limited funding from the Attorney-General in 2020-21 for the Family Safety Framework.

Ms HILDYARD: Why has there been a decrease in expenditure on staffing from 2019-20 compared with this year?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: That is not correct, though.

Ms HILDYARD: Pardon?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: So 2019-20?

The CHAIR: Questions are to be directed to the minister, as we have done. The minister has sought clarification, member for Reynell.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Sorry, are you talking about 2019-20 to 2020-21?

Ms HILDYARD: I heard the answer and there was an explanation that there was additional funding from Attorney-General—

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Which financial years are you talking about now?

Ms HILDYARD: So 2019-20 compared with this financial year.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Or last?

Ms HILDYARD: No, that was the first question that I asked. Now I am asking about the year before, because your answer detailing money from the Attorney-General, I guess, does not hold unless that money was also there in 2019-20. So there is a decrease even if when you take that out, and I am asking why. There has been a decrease in staffing.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: There is both time-limited funding that is contained within the prior financial years.

Ms VAS DEV: In 2019-20 and 2020-21, the funding was to administer commonwealth funding for the National Partnership on COVID-19 Domestic and Family Violence Responses.

Ms HILDYARD: Can I just clarify something, if that is okay?

The CHAIR: If the minister has concluded her answer.

Ms HILDYARD: I just have a point of clarification, if that is okay. I think it might be helpful. I do not understand, because the national partnership only started in 2020-21, so I am not quite sure how it would relate to 2019-20.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Just to clarify, with regard to the national partnership funding, there was funding that came in in 2019-20.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, that accounts for the decrease in staffing in entirety?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Yes, there is that and the AGD program.

Ms VAS DEV: They are both time-limited funding, and so staff were brought in to administer the national partnership, and so there will be a decline.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, can you guarantee that no positions have been cut that do not relate to the national partnership funding?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Yes.

Ms HILDYARD: I move now to page 89 and particularly to the highlights section. Exactly, minister, what financial commitment was made to hubs in 2020-21?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: In the last financial year; is that what you are asking?

Ms HILDYARD: Yes.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: In 2021, funding of $40,000 was allocated to the Port Lincoln hub. For Port Pirie there was $36,318; Whyalla, $24,030; Mount Gambier, $45,579; and the Fleurieu Peninsula at Goolwa, $40,000.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, exactly what financial commitment has been made for the establishment of safety hubs in this budget?

Ms VAS DEV: Grant funding was provided in one-off payments to services to support the cost of establishing safety hubs. Between June 2020 and June 2021 two FTEs were funded through the national partnership, the COVID funding, to fast-track safety hubs in Mount Gambier, Whyalla, Port Pirie, Port Lincoln and Goolwa.

Ms HILDYARD: Sorry, that was the last question. This one is for this financial year 2021-22.

The CHAIR: Member for Reynell, if you could just let the minister conclude her answer.

Ms HILDYARD: I just thought that might help.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: It is on an as needs basis as the locations are identified and the sites are scoped. There is a variety of different models. For instance, the one in Mount Gambier is in the library and the one in Port Augusta is co-located with KWY's services. There has been some project officer support to assist but there is also making one of the rooms at that site safe, providing computer access and those sorts of things, so it does vary depending on the model.

Ms HILDYARD: Just to clarify, minister, is there any financial commitment in this year's budget for the establishment of hubs, which is one of your targets for the financial year?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: They are pretty cost-effective, so when we identify sites we are usually able to find funding without too much trouble.

Ms HILDYARD: But there is nothing currently allocated?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I would not say that. We have a broad budget.

Ms HILDYARD: So where—

The CHAIR: The member for Reynell, please let the minister conclude her answer.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: There are a whole lot of things that you will not find in the budget that are there because they are aggregated amounts of money.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, will a hub be funded this year for outer southern Adelaide?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: In relation to the safety hub in the south, which I assume is what the honourable member is referring to, the department has been consulting with organisations in that region and has spoken to them in relation to a particular model. I understand some of the community would prefer a different model. We continue to be open to discussions with those organisations in relation to the establishment of a safety hub.

Ms HILDYARD: What steps have you taken to investigate the call for a funded hub from the southern community following the tabling of a petition to parliament by more than 3,300 people?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I guess one of the underlying questions in all of this is if women think that services are not available for them they might not seek help. Would you agree?

Ms HILDYARD: Sorry?

The CHAIR: Minister, unfortunately with this process questions are not directed to members of the committee. It works the other way around.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I am aware that the member for Reynell in particular has been running a campaign which has resulted in women in the south believing that services are not available for women who are experiencing domestic and family violence. My view is that that can lead to women not seeking assistance, and it is therefore dangerous.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, how do you think the many community members, organisations and collaborations feel about the lack of a response and, indeed, the comment that you just made?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: There are a number of services in the south for women who are experiencing domestic and family violence. They include Women's Safety Services at Morphett Vale, they include the Aldinga Beach Children's Centre, they include the Shark Cage Group. They include a number of services, and yet I have received correspondence from people that indicates to me that they think there are no services for women experiencing domestic violence in the south, which I can attribute, I assume, to the actions of the member for Reynell.

Ms HILDYARD: Are you suggesting that there is a lack of concern from community members or from particular organisations in the south about the need for a funded prevention hub in the south?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: No, I did not say that at all. I just said that your campaign has given people the impression that there are no services for women who need them in the south, and that is dangerous.

Ms HILDYARD: If a woman in outer southern Adelaide is looking for face-to-face support when she is either experiencing or at risk of experiencing domestic violence but does not require crisis accommodation, where would she go for specialist counselling, therapy, support?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: In the first instance, Women's Safety Services is the primary provider for those sorts of services for women across the metropolitan area.

Ms HILDYARD: So services beyond crisis accommodation?

The CHAIR: Member for Reynell, the minister has not completed her answer.

Ms HILDYARD: Is that Morphett Vale—

The CHAIR: The member for Reynell, the minister will be heard in silence.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: They provide a diverse range of services, including the ones that you have mentioned.

Ms HILDYARD: Can I clarify, then, that women in the south, who are at risk of experiencing domestic violence, can attend Women's Safety Services at Morphett Vale?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Women's Safety Services provides a range of services for women in the south, as do a number of other providers.

Ms HILDYARD: Women's Safety Services, can I just say, do an absolutely fantastic job in the south. I talk with them very regularly. My understanding is that they provide crisis accommodation and support. If I am wrong, please let me know, but my understanding is that for a woman who is not requiring crisis accommodation but, rather, is looking for specialist counselling, etc., that service is not specifically available at that Morphett Vale site. If I am wrong, please let me know.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I could not tell you precisely whether they offer counselling at that site. The reason why safety hubs have been important for women in regional South Australia is because of the tyranny of distance. That is the reason why we have established them in regional South Australia in the first instance. There is a robust set of services that operate across the metropolitan area, and Women's Safety Services is the primary provider of those. There are others as well. We can dig into our records and find you a list. I have already provided a list, which I think you are aware of, to the community organisations. There are also services in addition to that list.

Ms HILDYARD: Do you think that the call from women and organisations in the southern community for a funded domestic violence prevention hub is valid?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We would love to fund more services all the time across the state. We have a particular community model, which is operating incredibly successfully in regional South Australia, for which we train up Women's Information Service volunteers, and they have been assisting people. That is the sort of service that is being offered for the southern region. We remain open to negotiating with communities to advance that.

Ms HILDYARD: My questions now relate to the first sentence in the explanation of significant movement section on page 90. Minister, has your government delivered on each of the outputs set out in the national partnership agreement, and specifically can you guarantee that your government has delivered on the output requiring your government to ensure safer housing options for women experiencing domestic violence?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The honourable member would be aware of our commitment to expand the crisis beds, and we have delivered on those, which was an election commitment that we have provided. In addition, we provided funding through the safe and secure housing program of $1.754 million from round 4, 2020-21. Can you clarify the question?

Ms HILDYARD: In the national partnership agreement there are a series of outputs you have signed up to. I am asking whether your government has delivered specifically on the output in that partnership agreement around safer housing options for women experiencing domestic violence.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We are required to send a reconciliation to the commonwealth on the national partnerships, and my understanding is that they were satisfied with what we provided.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, how many representations have been made directly to your office over the past financial year about women experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, domestic violence who cannot access secure housing?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I would need to take that on notice. It is an interesting question. In the homelessness sector we used to have three different gateways, one being the specific domestic and family violence gateway, one having that terrible name 'generic homelessness', and also people would come through the youth stream. Certainly, we know that people do not always come through the door with a domestic and family violence tag.

It is probably difficult to quantify in that there may well be people who, if we were to crosscheck correspondence that came in via housing for someone requesting support, to double-check whether there was a domestic and family violence component would probably be an unreasonable impost on the services. Sometimes it is in the text of the letter itself, but sometimes it is in the Housing Authority records, or it may well be within a service within DHS, so it is difficult to quantify.

Ms HILDYARD: Minister, I know you have taken that one on notice, but to be clear the question is about the number of representations made directly to your office about that matter. I just wanted to clarify.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I might untake that on notice because I think it would be hard to quantify.

Ms HILDYARD: Moving to page 89 in relation again to the highlights and targets, particularly in relation to the Women's Leadership and Economic Security Framework, why is the women's leadership and economic security strategy not finalised at the date publicly committed to on your website?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: One of the many joys of COVID, it is now complete. It has been signed off by cabinet. We also have a new set of representation on the Premier's Council for Women and it would be one of their large tasks to make sure we are implementing that well.

Ms HILDYARD: What financial resourcing is allocated in the Office for Women to drive this strategy?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I will ask the director to respond to that one.

Ms VAS DEV: We are using existing resourcing to promote and implement that strategy.

Ms HILDYARD: So existing resources. Thank you. Minister, how specifically will the strategy address the issue of insecure work and its impact on wage inequality? Will the government now commit to supporting the proposed inquiry into insecure work and its impact on particular groups, including women?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Can you remind me whose inquiry that is?

Ms HILDYARD: It is a motion to the parliament by me.

Mr KNOLL: Point of order, Mr Chairman: I ask the member to identify which budget line this question comes from.

Ms HILDYARD: I did at the beginning. I already have.

Mr KNOLL: Then, Chair, can I ask how this question is relevant to anything that is inside the budget papers?

Ms HILDYARD: I would love to answer that. The women's leadership and economic security strategy—

The CHAIR: Member for Reynell.

Ms HILDYARD: —should absolutely go to the issue of insecure work.

The CHAIR: Member for Reynell and member for Schubert—

Ms HILDYARD: The strategy should absolutely go to insecure work and wage inequality.

The CHAIR: Member for Reynell and member for Schubert, I will provide the minister an opportunity to respond to the question.

Ms HILDYARD: Do you want me to restate the question?

The CHAIR: No, I am fairly sure the minister has the question.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Sorry, I actually cannot remember what the original question was.

Ms HILDYARD: How will the strategy address the issue of insecure work and its impact on wage inequality? Secondly, will the government now commit to supporting the proposed inquiry into insecure work?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The answer to the second question is that that is a question for the Treasurer in his industrial relations role. In relation to the first part, the matters that relate to women's employment necessarily look at issues such as insecurity, child care and advancement opportunities—the whole gamut.

The CHAIR: With that answer, we have gone over time.

Ms HILDYARD: We started two minutes late.

The CHAIR: I provided my statement in line with what I have done on every timing of every session so far. There is an opportunity, as other members have taken up, to submit questions through the usual processes. Members, given that time has expired, there are therefore no further questions. I declare the examination of the portfolio of the Office for Women complete.

Departmental Advisers:

Ms L. Boswell, Chief Executive, Department of Human Services.

Mr N. Ashley, Chief Financial Officer, Finance and Business Services, Department of Human Services.

Ms K. Hawkins, Executive Director, Strategic Policy and Reform, Department of Human Services.

Ms K. Biggins, Acting Executive Director, Community Investment and Support, Department of Human Services.

Ms F. Curnow, Acting Executive Director, Community and Family Services, Department of Human Services.

The CHAIR: Estimates Committee B will now move to a session examining proposed payments in relation to the portfolio of youth services. The minister appearing is the Minister for Human Services. The estimate of payments is, as I referred to earlier, relating to the Department of Human Services and the Administered Items for the Department of Human Services. I advise that the proposed payments remain open for examination. I call on the minister to make a statement, should she wish to, in relation to this portfolio. I do not believe there is too much of a switch in advisers, but she can inform us of that should she wish to.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I think you have met all the good officers of the Department of Human Services already, so I will move to my opening statement. The future of our state rests in the hands of our young people, with more than one in seven South Australians aged 12 to 24 years. That is why the voices of young people were central to the development of the Strong Futures SA Youth Action Plan 2020-2022, which was launched in April last year.

Hundreds of young people in the youth sector were engaged to ensure it reflected the needs, wants and aspirations of young South Australians. Put simply, the plan was developed by young people for young people. The Department of Human Services continues to oversee the progress of the Youth Action Plan, which outlines the Marshall Liberal government's strategy to share the vision of our youth for a South Australia that is safe, inclusive and sustainable for all young people, now and into the future.

The plan outlines the four priority areas of earn and learn, fair and inclusive, wellbeing and environment, and connect and grow. In the first year of the Youth Action Plan the department has focused on responding to the impact of COVID-19 on young people. DHS has partnered with the Local Government Association of South Australia in a $550,000 program of one-off youth-led COVID-19 grants. This has resulted in councils implementing 14 youth-led recovery projects spanning 23 local government areas, and to date it has engaged over 800 young people.

The department has also partnered with the Working Women's Centre and the Youth Affairs Council of South Australia to better engage young people in the youth sector to improve pandemic responses, including the development of a youth sector-led COVID-19 recovery plan. The three-year Youth Action Plan also provides a focus for collaborative efforts across government, with new initiatives generating meaningful change for young people.

DHS has commenced a partnership with Wellbeing SA to develop prevention-focused, community-based initiatives that support the wellbeing of young South Australians. These initiatives are 5 Ways to Wellbeing, a project which aims to increase understanding and build knowledge about five evidence-based ways to protect and promote mental and social wellbeing for young South Australians, such as building social connections, keeping your mind and body active, learning new skills and giving back to community.

The other is youth social isolation and loneliness. DHS, in partnership with Wellbeing SA and the Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing, is working with the Australian Centre for Social Innovation to codesign opportunities with young people in Port Pirie and Port Augusta to improve wellbeing and social connections of young people in regional and rural communities.

I have recently announced the outcomes of the competitive open tender for the Youth Support and Development Program. This program provides individualised support to young people across nine regions to build their capability to successfully engage in meaningful social, education and employment opportunities. To ensure a culturally specific approach, both Aboriginal and multicultural services have been engaged to focus on at-risk and vulnerable young people from these communities.

My department is continuing to focus on better supports for young people who encounter the Youth Justice system. Many young people under the age of 13 are in the Kurlana Tapa Youth Justice Centre for only a few days due to safety concerns whilst a safe place for them to stay is found rather than as the result of a criminal conviction. For this reason the Marshall Liberal government has provided funding for a child diversion program which will enable children between the ages of 10 to 13 to be accommodated in alternative secure locations rather than remanded into the high security Kurlana Tapa.

DHS will utilise a short-term accommodation program to provide an alternative location for children under 12 who come into police custody and will partner with community organisations to broker safe and supportive outcomes for these children. The department will shortly commence consultation on this innovative new approach.

In alignment with the Young People Connected, Communities Protected: South Australia’s Youth Justice State Plan 2020-2023, DHS has continued to partner with South Australia's Aboriginal elders, communities and non-government organisations to invest in connecting with community organisations such as SYC to deliver specific community service responses as a diversion for young people, currently connecting with 33 young people; to establish and open the Aboriginal Cultural Trail and Connection Space at the Kurlana Tapa Youth Justice Centre, a healing, education and connection space for Aboriginal young people in custody; to deliver the KIND program for young men and young parenting men who use family violence; and to establish the communities and justice Aboriginal community-controlled organisations forum to facilitate better partnerships with ACCOs and explore joint decision-making processes with Aboriginal communities in line with Closing the Gap targets.

The department continues to develop more therapeutic responses for young people under Youth Justice orders. It has established an enhanced support team at Kurlana Tapa. This is a team of skilled practitioners who work alongside youth workers in the accommodation units, responding to those with complex needs. It has developed a sensory modulation framework to better equip young people with the tools to understand their own sensory processing needs and develop self-regulation skills. It has also improved accessibility for young people, including modifying client-facing documents for easier comprehension and enhancing traditional verbal communication practices with visual aids.

The consolidation of services at the Kurlana Tapa Goldsborough Road campus was announced in last year's budget to provide young people in custody with access to better amenities, facilities and programs. The department has been working closely with key stakeholders to ensure the new infrastructure considers the needs of Aboriginal young people, young people with complex needs and both the physical and psychological influence of the environment. The department will continue to work this year to enhance efforts across government agencies, the youth sector and stakeholders to continue to provide outcomes for young South Australians.

The CHAIR: Lead speaker for the opposition, do you wish to make an opening statement?

Ms COOK: No thanks. I will do the omnibus questions, if that is okay.

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

What is the actual FTE count at 30 June 2021 and the projected actual FTE count for each year of the forward estimates;

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

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

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

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

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

How much is budgeted to be spent on goods and services for 2021-22, and for each of the years of the forward estimates period;

The top 10 providers of goods and services by value to each agency reporting to the minister for 2020-21;

A description of the goods and/or services provided by each of these top 10 providers, and the cost to the agency for these goods and/or services; and

The value of the goods and services that was supplied to the agency by South Australian suppliers?

3. Between 1 July 2020 and 30 June 2021, will the minister list the job title and total employment cost of each position with a total estimated cost of $100,000 or more which has (1) been abolished and (2) which has been created?

4. Will the minister provide a detailed breakdown of expenditure on consultants and contractors above $10,000 between 1 July 2020 and 30 June 2021 for all departments and agencies reporting to the minister, listing:

the name of the consultant, contractor or service supplier;

cost;

work undertaken;

reason for engaging the contractor; and

method of appointment?

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

How many FTEs were employed to provide communication and promotion activities in 2020-21 and what was their employment expense;

How many FTEs are budgeted to provide communication and promotion activities in 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24, 2024-25 and what is their estimated employment expense; and

The total cost of government-paid advertising, including campaigns, across all mediums in 2020-21 and budgeted cost for 2021-22?

6. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, please provide a full itemised breakdown of attraction and retention allowances as well as non-salary benefits paid to public servants and contractors between 1 July 2020 and 30 June 2021.

7. What is the title and total employment cost of each individual staff member in the minister's office as at 30 June 2021, including all departmental employees seconded to ministerial offices?

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

How much was spent on targeted voluntary separation packages in 2020-21;

What department funded these TVSPs (except for DTF estimates);

What number of TVSPs were funded;

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

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

9. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, how many executive terminations have occurred since 1 July 2020 and what is the value of executive termination payments made?

10. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, what new executive appointments have been made since 1 July 2020, what is the annual salary and total employment cost for each position?

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

12. In the 2020-21 financial year, for all departments and agencies reporting to the minister, what underspending on operating programs (1) was and (2) was not approved by cabinet for carryover expenditure in 2021-22?

13. In the 2020-21 financial year, for all departments and agencies reporting to the minister, what underspending on investing or capital projects or programs (1) was and (2) was not approved by cabinet for carryover expenditure in 2021-22? How was much sought and how much was approved?

14. For each grant program or fund the minister is responsible for please provide the following information for 2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24 and 2024-25 financial years:

Name of the program or fund;

The purpose of the program or fund;

Balance of the grant program or fund;

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

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

Carryovers into or from the program or fund; and

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

15. For the period of 1 July 2020 to 30 June 2021, provide a breakdown of all grants paid by the department/agency that report to the minister, including when the payment was made to the recipient and when the grant agreement was signed by both parties.

16. For each year of the forward estimates, please provide the name and budgeted expenditure across the 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24 and 2024-25 financial years for each individual investing expenditure project administered by or on behalf of all departments and agencies reporting to the minister.

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

18. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, what is the total cost of machinery of government changes since 1 July 2020 and please provide a breakdown of those costs?

19. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, what new sections of your department or agency have been established since 1 July 2020 and what is their purpose?

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

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

What measures are you implementing to meet your savings target; and

What is the estimated FTE impact of these measures?

I now move to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 91, the Youth Justice program. How has the proportion of those in the Youth Justice system, who identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, changed since the previous budget period?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think we are all very pleased that things are moving in the right direction. In terms of the individual children and young people who have been admitted to Kurlana Tapa Youth Justice Centre, the numbers overall are coming down, and I think, pleasingly, the proportion of Aboriginal young people has also gone down.

In 2019-20, there was a total of 308 individuals—and obviously with these figures there might be people who have returned—and in 2020-21, that figure is 256. Of those two totals, for 2019-20 there were 147 young people who identified as Aboriginal out of 308, so that is 48 per cent; the number in 2020-21 was 110 out of 256, which equates to 43 per cent, so it has gone down from 48 per cent to 43 per cent. It is obviously still too high, though.

Ms COOK: How many residents today are in the Kurlana Tapa Youth Justice Centre?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We have a daily tally—there are 28.

Ms COOK: How many current Kurlana Tapa residents are on remand, so not sentenced by the court as yet?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Do you mean as of today?

Ms COOK: Yes.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The advice is that of the 28 there are 26 who are unsentenced.

Ms COOK: There are how many?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Twenty-six.

Ms COOK: Unsentenced?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Correct.

Ms COOK: How many strip searches were performed on children in the Youth Justice Centre in the last financial year?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We will take that on notice. The advice I have received is that we would like to say none, but it depends on the timing in terms of the full body scanners. That has been a very useful initiative in the centre, to ensure that we do not need to conduct those searches anymore.

Ms COOK: Just in respect to taking that question on notice, would you break those down by partial and full body search?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We do not full body searches.

Ms COOK: So definitely no full body search?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: We never do full strip searches.

Ms COOK: Okay, thank you, good. In regard to continuing to place effort into prevention of young people entering Youth Justice, can I refer you to Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 82, regarding some of the early intervention programs and ask you, minister, if you have a measure of the outcomes of the family group conferencing pilot program undertaken by RASA? There is another one, Safe Kids, Families Together. Are you able to provide some outcome measures on those and also offer the future? In one of your statements earlier, you talked about extending funding till June next year; is that correct?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Both of those programs.

Ms COOK: Both of those. What is the vision for those, moving forward, from you in terms of long-term funding proposals?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I think the honourable member may have referenced a couple of programs that are actually in the child protection space. Can I say generally, though, that when it comes to the child family intensive support services they are very much about evidence base and very much focused on some of our most challenging families in South Australia, who we often know also have issues with domestic and family violence, and the current children can be the parents of the next generation. That is very much front and centre in terms of ensuring that children are growing up in safe, functional environments into the future.

There is a lot of intersection, I think, between a number of the programs that operate in this space, and ultimately having some experience with Youth Justice is something that we are working towards all young South Australians having as little to do with as possible. I will just ask the chief executive if she could add a few comments to that.

Ms BOSWELL: On the subject of family group conferencing, there is some family conferencing within the Youth Court, but that is not within our portfolio. The family group conferencing for child protection is within the portfolio of the Minister for Child Protection. However, in terms of the intensive family support program pilots that we have been running, including the category Y one, the Anglicare one and some of the programs—there is northern, western, and there is about to be one in the Benevolent Society in the south—the Parenting Research Centre is going to perform an evaluation of the intensive pilots we have so far, but that is northern and western. They have been up for a little while now, and we will be taking into account the outcomes of those as a prevention proposal.

Ms COOK: I refer to Budget Paper 4, volume 3, page 91, regarding Youth Justice and community orders. Last year, I asked questions regarding the privatisation of those programs. Since then, there has been an awarding of the contract. When did SYC begin delivering the service?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: My advice is that SYC commenced delivery of the metropolitan Community Service Order program, in partnership with Community Youth Justice, in February this year.

Ms COOK: When were the DHS Youth Justice staff actually first notified about that change?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: In terms of the tender being awarded to SYC, I am not sure—

Ms COOK: There are probably two phases: when the plan happened and the proposal, then the actual awarding and the cessation of their roles.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Yes, I think that would have been much earlier in the piece. The decision was made to change the service delivery to a community program. I may have even gone through this in question time, because I think it was in InDaily at some stage. We might take that on notice, because there was a level of consultation with the staff. We will take that on notice and provide some more details.

Ms COOK: Thank you. In respect to young people generally—Youth Services, Budget Paper 4, Volume 3, page 94, strategies to support young South Australians—can the minister, in reference to young people experiencing a crisis in their housing or a threat to their ongoing housing stability, advise who qualifies for the use of housing studios that can be provided from the Housing Authority but supporting young people to prevent homelessness?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I just need to add to the previous response in relation to the daily number of young people at Kurlana Tapa. Actually, at 5.30am it was 33, so the difference is that some have actually been at court and some have left.

Ms COOK: Thank you.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: This is probably a question that belongs in housing, but I will be generous again. In that particular program they need to be in contact with a homelessness service provider, so very much in the non-government sector, so be engaging in that space. The cohort of families that we are looking at are particularly focused on overcrowding in family homes. As we know with young people who enter the homelessness system, there is often a situation where their relationship has broken down with perhaps it might be their own parents or whoever is at home, so they may wish to relocate and live with a relative or trusted family member. There will be a range of different situations where people will be able to qualify for those.

My understanding is that Kids Under Cover have been talking to some local councils already, particularly Onkaparinga and the Barossa, because they have assessed that there may well be a particular need in those council areas. The relocatable studios actually need to have council approval, so there is a process to go through, but they do need to be engaged with a homelessness service provider.

Ms COOK: You have talked to Kids Under Cover. Will they target and make their services available to Aboriginal families where kinship care is so high?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I do not see why they would not. I might just pass over to the chief executive. She has a bit of an update on a previous question as well.

Ms BOSWELL: Regarding the Community Service Order program, on 28 February the year before, DHS announced to staff that alternative methods of metropolitan delivery were being explored. On 17 April, following a consultation period with staff, we announced that the metropolitan program would go out to tender. It went out to tender on 8 October 2020 and it closed on 5 November 2020. The evaluation process took place and, as you know, it commenced early this year. So it was not quite a year before that staff were notified that it was starting.

Ms COOK: In terms of young people and their risk around homelessness, you talked of overcrowding. In the RoGS earlier this year, you would be aware, we performed the worst in the country around particularly Aboriginal families and their overcrowding. Obviously, a lot of them are living in SAHA properties. Can those families apply to use a studio for their young people?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I do not think it is a question of applying to SAHA because the gatekeeper, if you like, is the specialist homelessness providers, so they would need to be engaged through that process. In terms of SAHA, though, they do have sleep-outs, I think they call them—

Ms COOK: Studios.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: —that they can add to particular properties as well.

The CHAIR: The time allotted for the examination of payments in relation to the portfolio of youth services has expired; therefore, there are no further questions. I declare the examination of the portfolio of youth services complete and the estimate of payments for the Department of Human Services and Administered Items for the Department of Human Services closed.

Sitting suspended from 13:16 to 14:16.