House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2) 51 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Salvation Army Alcohol Stabilisation Program SALVATION ARMY ALCOHOL STABILISATION PROGRAM Mrs REDMOND House of Assembly Heysen SALVATION ARMY ALCOHOL STABILISATION PROGRAM Mrs REDMOND (Heysen) (14:37): My question is to the Minister for Disability. Why has the minister again refused funding for the Salvation Army Alcohol Stabilisation Program? The Premier, Mr Rann, and minister Weatherill clashed with the Salvation Army after axing $750,000 in funding for the unit last year. The unit was due to close on 30 November 2007 but a benefactor donated $800,000, allowing it to remain open for another year. The opposition has been advised that the Salvation Army approached the government about a month ago asking whether funding could be allocated in this year's budget. The request was rejected. The unit assists about 100 homeless alcoholics a year on its residential program. The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly Cheltenham Minister for Families and Communities Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation Minister for Housing Minister for Ageing Minister for Disability Minister Assisting the Premier in Cabinet Business and Public Sector Management SALVATION ARMY ALCOHOL STABILISATION PROGRAM The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Minister for Families and Communities, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation, Minister for Housing, Minister for Ageing, Minister for Disability, Minister Assisting the Premier in Cabinet Business and Public Sector Management) (14:37): I thank the honourable member for her question. This was well traversed at the time when the decision was made, and the reason actually was contained within the question: they went off and sought alternative funding and secured it. Members interjecting: The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: I will take you through the process, the long process, that we undertook with the Salvation Army, if you want to hear it again. Mrs Redmond interjecting: The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Every single cent of the money from the Salvation Army was redirected into inner city services to help some of most vulnerable people, that is, Aboriginal people, in the inner city. Indeed, just this week I was touring the Parklands, Parklands 23, where a number of the community, not just Aboriginal people—but certainly Aboriginal people are unfortunately camping in our Parklands and sleeping rough in and around our city. This is the critical need that we were seeking to respond to—people sleeping rough, Aboriginal people who were the target of that program. If I can just remind members opposite how this all came about. Remember we had that anxiety attack by the former premier, Mr Olsen, when he decided he wanted to clear all the Aboriginal people out of Victoria Square and, of course, they were driven off into the Parklands. One of his responses, without any real consultation with the sector, was to give a wad of money to the Salvation Army, and that money was intended to be for a stabilisation unit. I see the honourable member, the former minister, who had a lot of difficulty in trying to make sense of that policy by the former government. It decided to do this without talking to the nearby residents and so it ran into enormous planning problems. Finally, this unit got up and running. We gave it a very good opportunity to run but, sadly, it did not achieve its objectives. We undertook an independent review and reached a conclusion that it was not reaching its objectives. We told that to the Salvation Army. We asked whether they could change the service model. They said they would not change it because it was their service model. It was meeting a statewide need. We did give it money on the basis that it was meant to meet a specific need for inner city homelessness. There were also issues about the way in which it was collaborating with other inner city agencies. However, we are past that now. The relationship with the Salvos has been put back on a good footing. I am sure they would like the money restored but we made it very clear at the time what our position was on that. There are always going to be hard decisions taken in this area of human services. The need is absolutely massive. However, those opposite do have a little bit of explaining to do. They do not advocate for the means to allow us to expand services to vulnerable people. They talk about tax cuts and stadiums instead of hospitals. They talk about tax cuts instead of disability services. That is the nature of those opposite. This faux outrage about vulnerable people—none of this is generated by them. They watched the news one night and saw the government had made a mistake, was owning up to a mistake, and they decided to take a tow on the back of it. It is faux outrage. Do not be persuaded for a moment that they care about this stuff.