Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Matters of Interest Families SA FAMILIES SA The Hon. R.I. LUCAS Legislative Council The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (15:32): I rise to speak to two issues. One is further to the issue that I raised in question time today, which I believe is an outrageous example of the policies and practices of both Families SA and this Labor government. Sadly, it is typical of how disgracefully inept and out of touch this government, its ministers and on occasions Families SA have become. There have been widespread examples and instances of the ineptness of Families SA—in particular the government and ministers—and this is but one further example of it. I outlined in question time today the potential turmoil and trauma caused to individuals and families in receiving what in essence was a fishing expedition letter from Families SA searching for the potential biological father of some children in relation to a particular case. That letter could cause major trauma and turmoil within the many families who would have received it. One can only imagine the views of the wives or partners of males who received a letter along these lines from Families SA where they had no connection at all with the particular case or example. It is not beyond the wit and wisdom, one would have thought, of any government minister or competent agency to conceive of the problems or to understand the problems of a letter drafted in this way and to have drafted a more sensitive letter which would have not caused the same problems that a letter drafted in this way might have caused or might still be causing in families in South Australia. Clearly, there may well be one particular family or individual concerned with this case but the many others who have received letters like this have no connection at all and do not deserve to be treated in such a cavalier fashion by a government agency, its minister and the government. Minister Hunter here today has indicated that while he was not sure he believes this is now the responsibility of minister Portolesi. If that is the case, it does not surprise me at all given the ineptness of that minister in terms of handling many other aspects of her portfolios. Certainly, I hope that whichever minister is responsible we will see an urgent response, an inquiry and a changed policy and practice instituted. The second issue is in relation to salary sacrifice. This issue has been raised by me and other members in this place before. I still have not received answers to the question from minister Wortley on it, even though the questions were asked a month ago. I put on the record that I have been further contacted by a representative of Vehicle Solutions Australia, who has indicated that a representative of theirs phoned the manager of Maxxia in South Australia, Mr Adam Hooper. The Vehicle Solutions representative claims that Mr Hooper said that Vehicle Solutions, as the third party, from 1 July would not be able to provide choice to the employees, as the state government will be advising the Crown Solicitor to pen a policy that will prevent any South Australian government staff member from using a third party until they had completed an education program, but Mr Hooper would not tell Vehicle Solutions what this entailed, just that it would block any third party from providing choice of novated leases. I hope that is not the case and that, in fact, is not the policy of the state government. I certainly put a question to the minister. I hope that, in reply to questions I asked back a month ago, he will respond to this particular claim as well because, as the competitive providers are indicating, the administration fee may well see a reduction in the cost of potentially up to a maximum of, say, $50 a year for a public servant. But the other costs, which I raised in the question, could potentially involve costs of $5,000 on a vehicle worth $50,000. So, these additional fees and costs are much more significant to public servants than any potential reduction in the administration fee. That is why it is important that the minister responds not only to the questions I raised a month ago but also to this further claim about the attitude of the state government made by the representative of Maxxia. Time expired.