ReturnToWorkSA

Mr KNOLL (Schubert) (14:28): A further supplementary: minister, 7,000 people minus 5,874 who have taken a redemption, minus 397 who are seriously injured, leaves 730-odd people who, at 28 June this year, are going to have ceased income maintenance payments.

The Hon. J.M. Rankine interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Wright is called to order.

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Child Protection Reform, Minister for the Public Sector, Minister for Consumer and Business Services, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (14:28): As I explained, I am capable of basic arithmetic in the same way as the member for Schubert. What I was trying to explain was—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. J.R. RAU: I know, it is a lot of numbers, but I am able to make that calculation myself. What I was trying to explain to the member for Schubert is that I know the number that was there in the beginning of January 2015. I know the number of people who, as at 15 June this year, had already been assessed as seriously injured. What I am trying to explain to the member is that I do not know whether, on an as-of-today basis, some of the 700-odd people whom the member referred to have otherwise had their claim resolved.

So, I am just saying there is no doubt that the number that the member has come up with must be a ballpark figure. It is probably very much around the mark as the maximum number of people who might be in that category. I explain again to members of the house, because it is very important, that the Return to Work scheme has not adopted the view that these people who are in this circumstance are simply going to get pushed out the door and left to fend for themselves.

The scheme has been working actively with these individuals for the last two years to try to offer them alternative jobs, training and reskilling. Where they are suffering from depression or other forms of anxiety which are interrupting their capacity to enter the workforce, we are attempting to engage with them from that point of view, and where they are people who would otherwise be entitled to a commonwealth benefit of some description, the Return to Work scheme is metaphorically putting its arm around these individuals and taking them to the appropriate commonwealth agency to assist them with making whatever application they need to make to the commonwealth agency.

Probably the question that the honourable member meant to ask but didn't was: how many of those people, who are the 700-odd maximum group of people, have not otherwise been satisfactorily assisted to an alternative? A large number of those people, by reason of having been assisted by the Return to Work scheme, will have engaged actively with the commonwealth's social security network and they will be in receipt of an alternative form of income maintenance.

I will do my best to find out what those numbers are. All I can say in addition, because I like to be as thorough as I can in answering the member for Schubert because I know he has an interest in this area, is that it may or may not be possible for me in my position to be able to find out from the commonwealth who exactly they have granted a benefit to and to whom they have not. The commonwealth may or may not be able to share that information with me. It may be that privacy arrangements pertaining to commonwealth benefits recipients prevent them advising me even of raw numbers. But I will make the attempt to find out what those raw numbers are, and I will do my best to be able to get back to the member for Schubert.