Estimates Vote

Department of the Premier and Cabinet, $508,394,000

Administered Items for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet, $27,324,000

Minister:

Hon. Z.L. Bettison, Minister for Tourism, Minister for Multicultural Affairs.

Departmental Advisers:

Mr W. Hunter, Chief Operating Officer, Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

Ms J. Kennedy, Director, Multicultural Affairs, Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

Ms C. Hodgetts, Director, Finance and Procurement, Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

The CHAIR: Welcome to today's hearing for Estimates Committee B. I respectfully acknowledge Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the traditional owners of this country throughout Australia, and their connection to land and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures, and to Elders both past and present.

The estimates committees are a relatively informal procedure and, as such, there is no need to stand to ask or answer questions. I understand the minister and the lead speaker for the opposition have agreed an approximate time for the consideration of proposed payments, which will facilitate a change of departmental advisers. Can the minister and lead speaker for the opposition confirm that the timetable for today's proceedings, previously distributed, is accurate?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: Yes.

The CHAIR: Changes to committee membership will be notified as they occur. Members should ensure the Chair is provided with a completed request to be discharged form. If the minister undertakes to supply information at a later date, it must be submitted to the Clerk Assistant via the Answer to Questions mailbox no later than Friday 5 September 2025.

I propose to allow both the minister and the lead speaker for the opposition to make opening statements of about 10 minutes each, should they wish. There will be a flexible approach to giving the call for asking questions. A member who is not on the committee may ask a question at the discretion of the Chair.

All questions are to be directed to the minister, not the minister's advisers. The minister may refer questions to advisers for a response. Questions must be based on lines of expenditure in the budget papers and must be identifiable 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 the 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 examinations will be broadcast in the same manner as sittings of the house, through the IPTV system within Parliament House and online via the parliament's website.

I will now proceed to open the following lines for examination: the portfolio of Multicultural Affairs. The minister appearing is the Minister for Multicultural Affairs. I declare the proposed payments open for examination. I call on the minister to introduce her advisers and make an opening statement, if she so wishes.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Can I introduce, to my right, Justine Kennedy, Director, Multicultural Affairs, Department of the Premier and Cabinet. To my left is Wayne Hunter, Chief Operating Officer, Department of the Premier and Cabinet. To my far left is Claire Hodgetts, Director, Finance and Procurement, Department of the Premier and Cabinet. I do not have an opening address; I am happy to go straight to questions.

The CHAIR: Member for Heysen, if you have an opening address then feel free, but otherwise just straight to questions.

Mr TEAGUE: What I might do before going straight to questions is to flag topics that, should there be time, I would be pleased to address across the hour. The first of those is the Multicultural Community Fund, welcome funds that I will ask some questions about shortly.

The CHAIR: What page?

Mr TEAGUE: I will get there in a second; I am just flagging the topics because I think there is a lot to remind ourselves of in terms of the bipartisanship associated with much of this. The second is the languages work that is obviously the subject of highlights and targets. Similarly, in the same vein, expenses, grants and subsidies that the new fund will talk to as well. Fourth is the pilot Empowering African Youth program. I would like to be able to get to each of those topics along the way.

Turning first to the new news, the Multicultural Community Fund. I think that might be best expressed at Budget Paper 5, page 58, the Budget Measures Statement, and we see there at point 5 on the page the Multicultural Community Fund. For completeness of reference, we might just have Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, pages 26 and 27 open at the same time. Am I reading this correctly, minister, that at page 27, where we see the program summary table going over the page, we see the grants and subsidies estimated result and budget and a $5 million variance there? That $5 million variance is the first budgeted year of the Multicultural Community Fund kicking in; I presume that is a direct correlation?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes, that is correct. Obviously, it was quite a significant announcement in this budget and I am very pleased that we have seen additional expenditure coming into the multicultural affairs budget. Can I particularly recognise that it is a brand-new Multicultural Community Fund, very much focused on developing and upgrading community infrastructure facilities and also hosting festivals and events.

Just by way of background, we obviously have a very diverse community here of people coming in different ways of migration. We particularly see post World War II migrant communities, which now have established community centres both in metropolitan and regional South Australia. With you as shadow minister for multicultural affairs, we often spend a weekend night. But newer communities themselves would like to have their own community facilities—they are ambitious to have their own space—so part of the drive to have this new fund is how we can work with them to achieve that outcome.

Mr TEAGUE: I thank the minister for that introduction to the topic. So as I understand it from the minister's introduction there, this is new funding and is not consolidated funds from any other former grant program?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: That is correct.

Mr TEAGUE: This is new money to multicultural affairs. I indicate at the outset, like so much in this space, it is welcomed in principle and is likely to reflect the bipartisanship in this space. Just in terms then to address, as far as might be possible at this stage—and I completely respect wherever the government might be at—we have had some recent history at both state and federal levels of examples of where there is an unparticularised fund that is established, and then there are questions about its distribution and the process for qualification for receipt of funds.

We all know that there are very many cultural communities in the state doing all kinds of meritorious things, including their own facilities, events, festivals and so on that are stood up for particular purposes. What can the minister tell the committee at this stage about how the fund will be distributed? Is there a determination that the fund will inevitably be distributed in full each year and, in that sense, aspects of the fund already earmarked, or is there to be a yet to be disclosed published means of navigating that for those that might want to take advantage of it?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It is more the latter than the former. We are in the process of developing guidelines and programs for expenditure of this new fund. If I can be very open with you about the situation where people have been talking to me over many, many years—and former shadow ministers as well—the process to either purchase or develop community facilities does take some time and, of course, that facility then also has to have planning approval. There is also the opportunity at times for councils to play a role in this.

It is my intention to have a little bit of a different program from what we have, to celebrate and expand facilities that open up. There is a very strict process, however. We would like to understand more clearly people's desires and their intentions, if they already own land, what that would look like, what savings that they have—more of a process where we work through them. The cost of buildings has obviously increased dramatically in the last few years, but the desire for communities to have a facility of their own has not changed.

We will be very clear about those guidelines and the process of the expenditure of that fund, but I just wanted to be clear about where it comes from after many, many conversations with people, because the desire to do this does not always run linear—money saved, land purchased, building built—it sometimes happens over many years.

Mr TEAGUE: The committee has heard the minister, by way of introduction already, address what perhaps I might describe as a long and proud continuum of migration to South Australia post World War II through to new communities. Is there or are there policy and funding objectives that sit behind this in terms of objectives to achieve particular outcomes in what is an extraordinarily diverse range of circumstances and communities? Or, and despite some of the pejorative context of the analogy, is it more properly to be navigated as an analogy to sports facilities type funds where if you have a sporting club and it is in need of a facilities upgrade, it will apply for funds and if it meets the criteria it will attract the funding? That is one version. Is there more to the policy underpinnings about objectives the government is looking to achieve that we might see expressed in the guidelines in due course?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We have had the Expand program and that has been very successful for quite some time. The maximum amount of money from the government that can be spent is $100,000 within that grant program, so the focus has often been around toilet upgrades and kitchen upgrades. When communities have sought to buy their own facilities or have more major upgrades for facilities, then obviously that needs more support, and so that is the understanding of the current restrictions that we have around the Expand grant, and the desire for people to have their own facilities with it.

The idea behind this is that we will work with communities to go through the process, because the timing of it often gets pushed out, depending on planning approval and finances that have been sorted. I think the point you are making is the why. The reality is that one in two of us are either born overseas or have a parent born overseas. This is us, diversity is the strength that we have, but people go through different stages of how they want to celebrate that diversity and preserve traditions and cultures. We have had a long-term bipartisan view in South Australia that we support that. Having safe spaces to gather is a key part of making that happen.

Mr TEAGUE: Some nuts and bolts then, perhaps: can the minister indicate to the committee when the fund will start taking applications and providing grants? Is there an anticipated number of recipients and is there any maximum/minimum amount that will be the subject of an individual grant?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We are in the process of developing those guidelines and programs and they will be clear and they will be available on the website of Multicultural Affairs.

Mr TEAGUE: Okay, we will wait and see. If I could put a plug in at that point, just speaking from my own portfolio interest, I would certainly flag an interest in providing any constructive input to that process, if the government might make that available.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I might even suggest that, in the conversations we have all had with different groups who have indicated that they are interested in facilities, we encourage them, when those guidelines are out, to come and have some conversations, because there is a longevity to making these things happen.

Mr TEAGUE: The minister has addressed this in part already. Again, perhaps by way of analogy, there are funds in other areas of government support where the access to the fund is subject to the applicant making a contribution of some substance to match it or contribute to it. In case there is that kind of criteria or any other, is the government confident, satisfied or maintaining a determination that the amount will be fully subscribed in the first year and each subsequent year, and is there any proviso or hurdle, if you like, that might be a cause for that not being fully expended in any given year?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes, it would be my expectation that it would be expended each year. We are very clear, when it is around community facilities, that timelines do move on when decisions have not been made. I am not saying from a government point of view, I am saying from planning decisions, financial decisions, from the association.

The intention would be to expend that money every year, but as we have not finalised the guidelines and programs, that is something we would take into consideration as to what that would look like. That would be a conversation with myself and the Treasurer, I imagine.

Mr TEAGUE: Coming back to the minister's characterisation, which I share, of this continuum of post war and before that—migrant communities that are well established all the way through to new communities—in terms of the maintaining of confidence and transparency in the program, will there be capacity for all who might be applicants and/or interested observers to see the criteria being applied and, therefore, to compare and contrast where funds are going in the space more broadly?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes, as with all of our grant processes, there will be very clear guidelines and procedures.

Mr TEAGUE: Is the minister aware of any example of a target for any of these funds, as we sit here now, any particular community or any example of how funds might be applied?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Obviously, we have not finalised those guidelines or procedures. I would say there are probably more than a dozen different communities that have spoken to me over the last five years of their intentions and their ambitions, whether they are ready or not. Obviously, the cost of land and cost of constructions have increased, but there are many who are interested in this program and will await those guidelines and procedures, and they will be very clear.

Mr TEAGUE: The minister refers in general terms there to what I would describe as a capital expenditure, capital project. Will the funds be applied for a mixture of capital and, for want of a better term, operating expense: on the one hand, the building or improvement of a structure, and on the other the funding of a recurring event?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: In general, not, but there is money for festivals and events. I think you are talking about two different things.

Mr TEAGUE: I am trying to identify what the fund—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: There is the capital, but there is also the ability to assist for festivals and events.

Mr TEAGUE: So to be clear: is the Multicultural Community Fund that is described at page 58 of Budget Paper 5 confined to capital projects?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: No. As I said in my opening remarks, very clearly, the focus is on developing and upgrading community infrastructure facilities and assisting to host festivals and events.

Mr TEAGUE: Yes. I understood the minister a moment ago to be referring to other sources of funds for such events, and that is understood. There are existing sources of funds for other events, of course.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I guess one could say that there is significant unmet need. Whether it is the Expand grant or the Celebrate grant, on average I say to people that only about 50 per cent of the applications that are put in are successful. There is a gap between where people would like to be supported to celebrate or expand their facilities and the amount of money that we currently have.

Mr TEAGUE: Suffice to say it is very clear that the Multicultural Community Fund will provide funds for a mixture of capital and operating expenditure events—a mixture of both. Is there any subdivision of the proportion that is contemplated? Could it all end up going on one of four recurring events, for example? I am not suggesting that it would, but in principle could it, if those were the most meritorious applications, or is there a preset subdivision in the fund each year?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We are in the process of developing those guidelines and procedures.

Mr TEAGUE: Okay. Similarly—the answer might be the same—is the minister saying that there might end up being a subdivision to ensure that there is not, as it were, 100 per cent capital allocation, for example? Or is the government keeping its options open about that as well?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We are in the process of looking at those guidelines.

Mr TEAGUE: Okay. I refer particularly to the words of explanation that sit below the table, from which it might be derived that it is not in the nature of the fund that we would expect to see a single payment of the full amount for the year to a single entity for a capital project. Is there any particular guidance that the minister can provide, or explanation to the committee, at this stage about how dispersed the funds might be?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Those guidelines and procedures have been worked out now, but it is not my intention for the fund that that money would go to one outcome only. However, I have to say, when it comes to facilities, $5 million does not go quite as far as it used to when we have seen average house prices go up.

So if people were looking to purchase a building and we were to support them with a grant for that, it could take quite a bit of that money. But that is not the intention of it, and those guidelines and procedures will be clarified in the near future.

Mr TEAGUE: I appreciate that that is far as it has got. I guess the committee will be alive to the fact that the Multicultural Community Fund, as described and set out in Budget Paper 5, is expressed in very round numbers. That points to the establishment of a nominal amount, as opposed to anything that is earmarked or predetermined and for reasons that are plain. The paragraphs of explanation below the table tend towards what the minister has described in principle being the application of funds for a variety of purposes.

Bearing in mind the minister's response in terms of how far $5 million goes in terms of capital projects, is there anything else the minister is able to say about perhaps the limits of the draw by any particular application? Would the minister see it as a sign of success if indeed the bulk of that money in any given year went to any single project, as opposed to it finding its way into a whole variety of projects?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: The demand is very clear. There is no intention for it just to go to one person, but the guidelines and procedures are being established now. There is much excitement that the Malinauskas Labor government has put this additional funding for multicultural communities, and that is how it will proceed.

Mr TEAGUE: The minister might understand a degree of pressing the point given that time is always short but is somewhat shorter than one might normally see in terms of an ordinary budget year. There is to be an election before the end of the subject year. Is it the objective of the government to identify the application of all of the funds, indeed, prior to the end of the budget year prior to the election in March 2026?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Once those guideline and procedures are established, then it will be very clear as to what the process will be, just as it is with our others. For example, in the Celebrate Together program that we have, 124 people were successfully supported through that and received up to $30,000 for festivals and events. That was to run over this last financial year. We have always had quite clear processes, and I have no intention of that not continuing.

For the Expand Together Grants, for example, we have had the two rounds. Round 1 is a smaller group. This is where organisations can apply for funding up to $100,000 for equipment and infrastructure, security upgrades and community transport. In that situation, we ask for matched funding for anything more than $50,000. To go to the point of the need, 187 applications were received, but only 69 multicultural organisations were successful.

Mr TEAGUE: Having gone there—I appreciate the minister referring to that process by way of analogy—is there any reason why the government has determined to establish what it describes as a new fund, hence finding its way into Budget Paper 5, as opposed to simply providing more funds to existing programs or more to the budget? We see that expressed in the program summary in terms of the $5 million extension to the programs and budget.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I go back to what I have already said: that developing and upgrading community infrastructure facilities is obviously something that has been raised with me as the minister for quite some time. For newer arrival groups, particularly those who have come as humanitarian migrants, we hear that the ability to establish their own facilities has been much more challenging. That is why we as a government have made this significant decision.

As I said, there is an unmet need met with the Expand Together Grants, but that is quite minimal in terms of what you can have: it is a maximum of $50,000 unmatched, up to $100,000 matched. That is a significant program, but obviously it does not enable the purchase of a community facility or an upgrade. So we are very clear that, in order to support our diverse community—some who have come here in many different ways, as skilled migrants, international students and humanitarian migrants—we want to work with them to establish these facilities.

Mr TEAGUE: I do not read from the minister's answer any flagging of inadvertent bias, in the objective sense, or intent in the application of the Multicultural Community Fund so far as it might affect those new migrant groups. I hear the minister loud and clear that this is overtly directed at all our migrant communities, from the very first to the most recent.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Perhaps I might even say that those that are quite established are looking to renovate. In the member for Adelaide's area we have just seen a significant upgrade of one of the clubs there, which is very actively used by many other groups as well. But the type of upgrade that is required is higher than the $100,000, and there are significant upgrades that are required.

Sometimes we find, where we have ageing communities, that the way that they use their community hall is changing. They want a smaller area that they can use more regularly, on a weekly basis, and then have a larger hall area that can be used by other groups as well. So it is not restricted to new people and newer communities. But obviously there is a growing need, and the other groups have been talking to me for some time.

Mr TEAGUE: I would note my gratitude, and I expect the committee's gratitude, for the presence of senior officials with the minister today.

I would ask: is the government flagging a particular virtue, I suppose, in establishing the fund in the budget paper, albeit in general terms for these purposes, to distinguish the fund and its criteria and application from what might otherwise be the sorts of election commitments that can become controversial, where the only grounds upon which the government might subsequently justify the expenditure is, 'Well, it was an election commitment,' and ipso facto that is okay—as opposed to the establishment of a fund that the minister has said will have, if it does not already, published criteria, guidelines and transparency for everybody's confidence and all the rest of it, akin to other programs of that kind where there is oversight in advance and the ability to interrogate application of funds and so on? Is that a fair—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I think the answer that you are seeking is yes.

Mr TEAGUE: That is in praise, really, of the process. I am endeavouring to—if this is establishing appropriate best practice in terms of the disclosure of the government's intent, albeit in general terms, then I appreciate the minister's positive response.

I have flagged four topics, and I am conscious of time. I will move to the second of them. Just as I do that, might it be presumed, or can the minister confirm, that the minister and/or the department will publish a periodic, perhaps annual, summary of the outcomes?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: In general they are available on the website.

Mr TEAGUE: I thought so. I think we are with Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, page 26 or 27 for the duration now. At page 26 of Budget Paper 4, Volume 4, keeping an eye on highlights for 2024-25 and targets for 2025-26, I refer to the first of those highlights. It is expressed in terms of a continuation to support communities keep their language alive. What was the total amount spent on community language schools in 2024-25 and how much is going to be spent in this coming year?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: This is an election commitment we made about investing an additional $4 million over four years for community language schools. The funded one for 2024-25 is $702,334 ex GST. That supports 93 active and fully-accredited community language schools teaching 48 different community languages. In semester 1 of this year 9,192 students were enrolled in the program. We work very closely with the Department for Education and, of course Community Language Schools South Australia.

If we reflect on 2024-25, the activities have focused around school premises, personnel, and pathways. We have made significant changes, since coming to government in 2022, about proactively supporting community languages to remind ourselves that often there are volunteers who can put up their hand every single week to support their community to keep their language strong.

From the premises point of view, we have continued to top up the funding to government and non-government schools that host our community language schools. That was a significant change in the last few years; previously only government schools received a top up. From a personnel point of view, we are continuing to support additional staffing for Community Language Schools South Australia and are looking at professional development training for those school leaders.

One of the other areas I was particularly interested in is that we have seen the significant drop out between the ages of 12 and 15 of young people learning a language. Often through primary school they are quite dedicated and their families are committed. The pathway program supports Community Language Schools South Australia on the vocational and SACE pathways for secondary students who study a language at our community language schools with the desire, obviously, to see some increased rates of year 12 SACE language being undertaken but also people continuing with that.

One of the most important changes is that people often quite feel isolated in their different schools, and we have now had the establishment of community language learning hubs at Regency Park TAFE, Salisbury TAFE, Torrens University Adelaide, and at Charles Campbell College at Paradise. These hubs aim to cluster several of the language schools together to share learning spaces, materials and equipment. At the moment these hubs support 12 schools offering nine languages. We are very pleased to anticipate there will be an additional 100 students commencing at the Charles Campbell College hub from term 2 this year.

We have also been supporting a digital language learning hub to create and share teaching via e-resources of Arabic, Mandarin, Vietnamese, Greek and Farsi. With the development of this digital language learning hub there may be an opportunity for Community Language Schools South Australia to have some income separate to government, and to sell that digital language learning hub throughout Australia as well to create some autonomy and some opportunity there. I have approved a funding proposal for the activities for 2025-26, the fourth and final year of this election commitment. That funding agreement will commence on 1 July this year.

Mr TEAGUE: But what is the amount?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Can I just say that this is an area that has been, for me, a rich opportunity to take something that has been around for a very long time and contemporise and support them in a different way to make it accessible to have the hubs for that connectivity with people doing different languages, so I am really pleased with the way it has rolled out, and I look forward to reporting on its successes.

Mr TEAGUE: In terms of the $4 million, am I right then in understanding the answer for 2024-25 was $702,000? The minister has indicated signing an agreement for the year ahead.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: What is the quantum of that agreement for the year ahead? Is that representing the amount to be spent for that—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It is $1.2 million for 2025-26. Every second year the Community Language Schools have an infrastructure component to support groups that own their own facilities and run classes there. Every second year that happens.

Mr TEAGUE: Therefore, that is a pattern that is repeated, with the outcome that the $4 million is expended, the result of the agreement that the minister has signed for the year ahead?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes, that is correct.

Mr TEAGUE: In terms of the receipt of those funds, will those funds then flow immediately? What is the timeline for that?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes, it is a very well established funding pattern. We have the agreement signed and then those facilities would go. Perhaps I can give some breakdown for you here. Funding to Catholic and Independent host schools, $105,900; to the Community Language learning hubs, $90,172; and then staffing for the Community Language Schools is $90,000, so you can see how it is broken up over that period of time.

Mr TEAGUE: Is there such a thing in the data as—the minister has referred to the 12 schools, nine languages.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: In the hubs.

Mr TEAGUE: In the hubs. In terms of the overall and, if possible, broken down according to year, if that is a helpful breakdown, can the minister advise the committee how many students are supported participating in the—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: There are 692 in the hubs.

Mr TEAGUE: Overall, though—so 692 in the hubs.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I think I spoke about that earlier—

Mr TEAGUE: You might have.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It is 9,192.

Mr TEAGUE: So 9,192 overall so far?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: For semester 1. That is how many were enrolled in the program.

Mr TEAGUE: That is a point in time for this semester 1 just passed.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: That is correct.

Mr TEAGUE: We can do the maths, but is there a number that the government adheres to that might describe a cost per student?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I will endeavour to get that answer for you. There is a calculation that is worked out that is paid to support per head of student to do that work. That has been worked out with Education over a long period of time. For 2024-25, the education department allocated on a per student basis $113,730, which is that $29.55 per student.

Mr TEAGUE: Yes, and the interaction with the Department for Education is clear: the Department for Education is providing advice to the minister's department in relation to those costs per student. Is that the way that is—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: That is correct. We have an agreement with them.

Mr TEAGUE: And the funds are coming from DPC via the Multicultural Affairs program to the Department for Education for that purpose.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: The previous minister is reminding me that the per student funding is education department funding and has been for some time.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: One of the key things with the election commitment was a multicultural lens. Education, obviously, has done the heavy lifting for many, many years in this area and we respect the work that they do. We felt there was an opportunity to lean in more strongly and develop this in a more contemporary manner and that is what that additional funding has done.

Mr TEAGUE: That additional funding in the amount of $4 million has been applied over the period, as the minister has indicated?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: Turning now to the third of the topics, again still on page 26 and 27, I go about two-thirds of the way down page 26, the beginning of the program summary table, and then, following that over the page, the expenses, grants and subsidies. The 2024-25 estimated result is just short of $7.5 million, at $7,493,000, and that is 675 I think, just doing the maths, as I look at it over the budget for 2024-25. There is an explanation for that by reference to some carryover, I think, but is there any explanation for that estimated result over budget? While the minister is at it, is there a breakdown of the grants and funding provided and to what groups, including that overrun?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: You are asking about additional expenditure. There was some support for the Ukrainian community support program. There was a return of grant funding in the previous year and a reclassification of expenditure across categories. That accounts for the differences.

Mr TEAGUE: Minister, each of those three categories of spending account for that difference that we see between the budget 2024-25 and the estimated result 2024-25.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes, as I am advised.

Mr TEAGUE: Is there any particularisation of the amounts for each of the three categories?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I will have to take that on notice and come back to you and look at that, but they are quite minor.

Mr TEAGUE: In relation to the first of them—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: The Ukrainian support program?

Mr TEAGUE: Yes.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: That was $175,000.

Mr TEAGUE: Was that additional to funding that had already been identified and applied for that purpose?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: That was additional. Obviously, you would be very aware of how we have supported our Ukrainian community, particularly in Hindmarsh, where they have a facility that has been operating some programs over the last three years. As you may recall, people had to flee quite quickly. We have had some packages there. When they first came, they were on a visa that did not allow them work rights or access to Medicare and then we announced a package in March 2024 for the new arrivals from the Russia-Ukraine conflict and Israel-Hamas conflict. That was coordinated by the Department of Human Services.

We have been working with the Ukrainian association about other things. Part of that package supported the Refugee Health Service, mental health funding, access to dental care, a free Metrocard and some food vouchers, but the specific one that went to the Association of Ukrainians in South Australia, I understand, that has gone for three years in a row is to provide some language support services and settlement services.

Can I take this opportunity to thank the association, which is very established here. They are an older cohort of people who have opened their arms and their homes and have given lots and lots of volunteer time to support people as they settle here. We have given them additional funding to support that over three years.

Mr TEAGUE: In terms of that $175,000 featuring in the estimated result, the minister has referred to the March 2024 announcement and unsurprisingly—call it heavy lifting by DHS in this space, given the circumstances. I am not asking the minister to provide the committee with particulars about DHS's involvement. Was there a particular reason for the $175,000, as it were, being identified on its own as distinct from carryover and the timing of it coming from this program?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: This was a community support program that was specifically run by the Association of Ukrainians in South Australia. I think it was the third year that had been funded with the understanding probably in previous years that funding might not need to happen for the third year, but it did. That is why it was additional, because, obviously, at the end of every year, when that community support program has been conducted and we audit it and we talk to them about it, we then ask about the need and does it continue.

Mr TEAGUE: Then considering the balance of the grants and subsidies that are the subject of that estimated result, we get a clue from the 2024-25 budget because it is a specific number, $6.818 million, and we have a very specific number in the estimated result, $7.493 million. Can the minister provide—and it may be convenient to table it in line with committee rules—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I can give you some more information.

Mr TEAGUE: —in a convenient way what the breakdown is and to what groups?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: One of the other additional expenditures was money to the Adelaide Holocaust Museum, which is $167,000 per annum for four years, as announced in the budget last year to expand its educational activities. We know that the Adelaide Holocaust Museum has been a target for antisemitic behaviour. We spoke in the parliament on the use of extremist symbolism. These incidents identified a need for them to increase their security measures and the quantity of their education programs and exhibitions.

This additional funding enabled them to also expand their opening hours and to make sure that there is a knowledge out there among people, and particularly schools have been going in as well. Just by way of background, the Holocaust Museum and the Andrew Steiner Education Centre was launched in November of 2020 at 33 Wakefield Street. Of course, they have a very active education program as well, which can be on site and online as well.

Mr TEAGUE: Did the minister say $167,000 over four years?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Per year.

Mr TEAGUE: Yes, just to be clear for the committee. That was my understanding as well.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: The budget is $171,175 because it includes indexation for 2025-26. So that was another change.

Mr TEAGUE: In terms of addressing the question about breakdowns and groups, perhaps there is not time to set those out in full here. I wonder whether it may be convenient—

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I could list them if you like, but they are publicly available.

Mr TEAGUE: Yes, they are publicly available, and I wonder whether, for the sake of the committee's reference, there might be some compliant table that might be included?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It is fully available on the website.

Mr TEAGUE: If that is the best reference–

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes.

Mr TEAGUE: —then I appreciate that from the minister.

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It is very transparent, all on the website.

Mr TEAGUE: The minister has addressed, by way of example, the funding to the Holocaust Museum. In terms of perhaps a picture, a range of quantum, is there a highest single amount that the minister can identify and a lowest, just to give a range of those grants and subsidies?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: I have given you two examples: the $175,000 to the Ukrainians, and $167,000 to the Adelaide Holocaust Museum. They would be the highest amount per annum.

Mr TEAGUE: Again, I thought so, but it is good to confirm. The minister has indicated that is all publicly available, but those are the two largest amounts?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: Yes, they are the largest ones from 2024-25.

Mr TEAGUE: The minister might forgive me if this is completely publicly available already as well, but can the minister advise the committee the proportion of funding that is recurring or multiyear as opposed to one-off capital or event expenditure that is the subject of those grants for the relevant year?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We do not actually provide a breakdown of how much is for Celebrate and how much is for Expand, but I can tell you that the 2024-25 multicultural grants program budget was $6.971 million. It moves between those, and the Stronger Together money as well within that. The multicultural grants program budget is $6.971 million.

Mr TEAGUE: I am conscious of the few short minutes remaining, and I have flagged the fourth of those broad topics. I will just go there, and again we are at page 26 of the relevant volume, Volume 4. Targets 2025-26 might be the focal point, and the pilot Empowering African Youth Program, supporting the early intervention measures and culturally responsive services and programs. What is the quantum of funding for this year coming and over the period of the forward estimates?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: It is $2.5 million over the forward estimates, which was announced in the state budget of last year. Obviously, we have just completed the first year of that program. The expenditure for the Empowering African Youth Program for 2024-25 was $617,128 as at 16 June. There may well be some slight change. That is divided up between $153,000 for the program manager, $100,000 ex-GST allocated to the African Communities Council of South Australia, $3,140 to transport students for the launch on 9 May, $14,000 allocated to Flinders University for the development of a comprehensive monitoring, evaluation, research and learning plan for the four-year program, and $346,988 allocated to program service providers for the provision of early intervention measures. The 2025-26 budget is $635,000.

Mr TEAGUE: So it is similar amounts, a slight uptick from this first year. Can I perhaps roll up a series of questions that might be conveniently answered altogether? What programs might be described as constituting the pilot as opposed to ongoing, and will the program as it proceeds be provided by the agency or in partnership with community groups that are funded for the service providers?

The Hon. Z.L. BETTISON: We do not refer to this as a pilot any more—this is now the program that we will have, and it commenced in January of this year. Year 1 of the program focused on seven target schools in northern Adelaide with a high population of students from diverse African backgrounds, including Craigmore High, Mark Oliphant College, Salisbury East High School, Parafield Gardens High School, Playford International College, Roma Mitchell Secondary College and Salisbury High School.

In January of this year, the Department for Education employed an additional African Community Liaison Officer to work in those participating schools. Mentoring, coaching and counselling, which is a culturally specific, non-government service provider, has been funded to deliver the SACE-accredited Village Program in those participating schools.

The Village Program, which we think is something pretty unique and we are getting fantastic feedback so far, is a structured in-school group cultural support for African students, as well as one-on-one mentoring and case management for students who benefit from additional personalised support.

Other non-government organisations involved are STTARS (Survivors of Torture and Trauma Assistance and Rehabilitation Service) and Mission Australia as well. At the moment, commencing in term 1 of this year, 185 students were enrolled in the program across those seven schools.

The CHAIR: The time allotted having expired, I declare the examination of Multicultural Affairs complete. Further examination of the proposed payments for the Department of the Premier and Cabinet is adjourned until 2.45.

Sitting suspended from 10:02 to 10:15.