Question Time

National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Leader of the Opposition) (15:18): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Human Services a question regarding Aboriginal housing.

Leave granted.

The Hon. K.J. MAHER: Mr President, 1 July often marks a new beginning in many different ways: new programs, a new financial year, and new opportunities. Sadly, though, 1 July 2018 has marked the first day in over a decade where South Australian Aboriginal remote communities knew that they do not have the support of their new government, the Liberal government, when it comes to their future housing needs. There has been a flurry of media releases and media reports from both the Western Australian and Queensland governments, providing updates on the status of their negotiations of new NPARIH agreements, but there has been deafening silence continuing from South Australia. My questions to the minister are:

1. Pursuant to the expert panel that the federal government convened on the issue, can the minister advise how many new houses will need to be built in remote Aboriginal communities over the next 10 years and their cost?

2. What is the funding amount and/or split that the minister has requested between the state and federal governments?

3. Has the federal government made any offer of funding to the state government to this date noting media reports of the federal minister, Nigel Scullion, that a deal is imminent?

4. Given the gravity of this issue, what communities has the minister visited to discuss the issue?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (Minister for Human Services) (15:20): I thank the honourable member for his important question. He really does like to land his own former government in the poo, so to speak, for their lack of action on this—

The Hon. K.J. Maher interjecting:

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Well, I am sure that they do. I hope that they do.

The Hon. K.J. Maher interjecting:

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I hope that they do.

The PRESIDENT: Can the minister not have indirect dialogue with the Leader of the Opposition, and can the Leader of the Opposition not bait the minister.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: It is true that the former agreement has expired on 30 June. My understanding was that it provided some $290 million, perhaps a little bit more over a 10-year period. It was entirely commonwealth funding and, for a long time prior to that agreement, the federal government was seeking some input from the former state government in relation to what funding the then state government was prepared to put on the table.

The $290 million reminds me of another figure that was talked about during the election campaign which was the tram to Norwood that nobody wanted, so I would just like to point out for the benefit of readers that in the lead-up to the election campaign I am not aware that the state government provided any money on the table, or provided any money through its costings document to solve this important issue of executing the remote housing agreement.

Indeed, I have a copy of a draft letter, which I'm not sure was ever written because it is not signed, but it was drafted on behalf of the Hon. Zoe Bettison, who was the then minister for social housing, writing to the Hon. Nigel Scullion, Minister for Indigenous Affairs. I won't quote the entire thing, but it says—and I can't be sure that it was ever sent:

As part of the Housing and Homelessness Ministers' Agreement in Adelaide on 19 May 2017, Housing Ministers from Queensland, Northern Territory, Western Australia and South Australia met to discuss remote housing issues, including the future of funding for remote housing beyond 30 June 2018.

Noting that the agreement ends on 30 June; 'we seek an urgent meeting with you', etc.; the date proposed is 23 August 2017.

I make those remarks to the council just to say that the former government was well aware that this funding agreement was due to expire. The Leader of the Opposition may well be able to enlighten the house himself. He may wish to make some sort of explanation as to whether, as a member of the former cabinet, he was aware that there were funding issues brought to cabinet and whether negotiations were taking place, because certainly in the time that the Marshall Liberal government has been in place we have had a number of things come to cabinet, including the recent homelessness and housing agreement, which I unfortunately had to defer signing in order to try to execute this issue of remote housing which, unfortunately, delayed some of the confirmation to the sector that their funding was available, even though I had written to them in April just to let them know that funding was going to be available.

So it is really unfortunate that we have found ourselves in this situation. I have advised that I have met with Mr Scullion. I am not prepared, and I've said this before—and I am not sure whether the Leader of the Opposition is actually hard of hearing or not—but I'm not going to detail the negotiations prior to their conclusion. That would not be a sensible approach to take, so that means I am not going to talk about data or where things are at. But, suffice to say, we are negotiating in earnest and we are doing a great deal more than the Labor Party ever did in its time in office to try to resolve this issue.

Having been fully aware that the remote housing agreement was due to expire, what on earth did they do? During the election campaign, when they were throwing $290 million for a tram at Norwood that nobody wanted, where was their commitment to remote housing in that context because that would have gone a long way to assisting to resolve this issue?

It's really quite hypocritical of the Leader of the Opposition. Having been a member of the former cabinet, hopefully he was aware of discussions that took place at cabinet level—one can only guess—but what on earth was he doing to try to execute these things? I am doing everything that I can. The officers in my department and Treasury officials are doing everything that we can to execute this matter as rapidly as possible, and when we have some information it will be made publicly available in the usual manner.