Balyana Supported Independent Living

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:33): My question, again, is to the Premier and perhaps, bearing in mind, in light of that answer. Will the government consider all reasonable means of ensuring that Balyana continues to provide supported accommodation, including bringing it into DHS-supported accommodation services, approaching another accommodation provider or, as has been put to me, selling it to family and supporters of the residents?

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Premier) (14:34): The short answer to the deputy leader's question regarding are we looking at all options, including other providers or even DHS providing services ourselves, is yes, but not with a view to permanency but with a view to orderly transition.

The Balyana site itself is run-down. The advice we have received is that it is reaching a point where it is no longer fit for purpose. People in these supported accommodation environments deserve to be treated with dignity in accommodation that is appropriately maintained and suits the needs of the people who are living there. It hasn't been maintained to a standard that we would think best fits their legitimate requirements. They are obviously old facilities. Old facilities either need to be heavily invested in, in terms of maintenance, or new facilities need to be accommodated. That hasn't happened in the way that potentially it could have.

Our intervention seeks to stave off the unplanned transition. We don't have plans for permanency at Balyana. Our plans are to make sure that we can graduate a transition off the site, but that's not going to happen this year. We are not trying to get people off in a matter of weeks or even immediate months. It needs to be done in a thoughtful way in conjunction with the people who are there. Whether it be done via DHS or another provider, they are options that are on the table.

But to be clear, there has never been a suggestion from the government that our plan was to retain Balyana to continue to operate for the purposes that it currently does in the long term. We said that from the outset. There are more appropriate places for people to go to; they just need to be found and worked through thoughtfully and compassionately in conjunction with families. I don't think Bedford has communicated that plan as effectively as what it otherwise could have been with those families—as I said, that's a matter of judgement, but that is my judgement because if there is any uncertainty to that end, then clearly there has been a point of failure in terms of that communication to the families. But the government's position has been consistent and clear.