Cora Barclay Centre and Can:Do 4Kids Merger

The Hon. C. BONAROS (14:46): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Human Services about the proposed merger of the Cora Barclay Centre with Can:Do 4Kids.

Leave granted.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Three days ago, the media reported that the renowned Cora Barclay Centre, a crucial service provider for deaf and hearing-impaired children for more than 70 years, is being forced to merge because of lack of adequate funding. The centre is facing a merger with Can:Do 4Kids to ensure continuity of services. It is directly attributable to the NDIS, as the service is not receiving enough funding to sustain vital services. In 2017, the former Labor government requested an independent audit of the centre, which showed that it had suffered losses of about $1.6 million due to implementation issues during the rollout of the NDIS.

In response, the government provided some $430,000 in compensation for the loss of funding from the NDIS, which we know focuses on a one-size-fits-all funding model. My question is: why has the renowned Cora Barclay Centre not been adequately funded by the state government? What, if anything, is being done to address this? What is the government doing, more generally, to address implementation issues with the NDIS to avoid other charities from having to go down a similar path in less than positive circumstances? Will this include further compensation for rollout delays?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (Minister for Human Services) (14:48): I thank the honourable member for her question. I think it's important, at the outset, to point out that the merger has been a voluntary one. I think it would be fair to say that both Cora Barclay and Can:Do 4Kids probably weren't really that delighted with the way the story was portrayed as a bit of a hostile takeover because there are a number of positives in terms of the merger. I will return to that in a moment.

Just to talk about the NDIS generally, I think it has been a big challenge for a number of providers across Australia, really, because they are shifting from a position where they have been provided with quarterly block funding in advance to a contestable market, which I think certainly has bipartisan support. I would be surprised if it doesn't have the support of all the other parties around Australia as well because it focuses on putting choice and control towards consumers so that they purchase the services of their choice.

They all have to change their business systems approach because they need to have new invoicing systems and the like. On that front, they all have access to the Community Business Bureau. They are being provided support in order to change their business systems. Certainly, the feedback that I have had from the non-government sector about that process has been quite positive and they are working through that.

As we know, the cohort of children was the first to enter the NDIS so some of the children's services are the ones feeling the impacts prior to the adult services. I think that some of the children's services are under some pressure. What is happening to the funding is that money that used to flow into the state and then be provided on a quarterly basis to the providers now goes to the NDIS, and the NDIS is responsible for distributing that to the individual participants—that is the language they use rather than 'clients'—and the clients are then in a position to choose particular services.

I would like to acknowledge the heritage of both the Cora Barclay Centre and Can:Do 4Kids in South Australia. Cora Barclay has been operating for nearly 70 years and Can:Do 4Kids—people may be familiar with the name of Townsend House which was established in 1874 as a school for accommodation for deaf and blind children, so it has been operating for a very long time in South Australia. Both of those organisations have been providing valuable services and service different client groups. From what I understand, these services will continue under the new branch.

Obviously, with a larger organisation, there are opportunities for moving—where one has a well-developed system that can be utilised in other areas. From my understanding, all of those services will continue and no services will be lost, and there should be a stronger provider in the long term.