<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>Legislative Council</name>
  <date date="2018-11-15" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>54</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="2123" />
  <endPage num="2173" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Community Visitor Scheme</name>
      <text id="201811156780b10b8b94414680000390">
        <heading>Community Visitor Scheme</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4697" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. K.J. MAHER</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Leader of the Opposition</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2018-11-15">
            <name>Community Visitor Scheme</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2018-11-15T14:29:34" />
        <text id="201811156780b10b8b94414680000391">
          <timeStamp time="2018-11-15T14:29:34" />
          <by role="member" id="4697">The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Leader of the Opposition) (14:29):</by>  A further supplementary: can the minister inform the chamber what the existing state federal funding mix is for the visitor scheme?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="2742" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Minister for Human Services</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2018-11-15">
            <name>Community Visitor Scheme</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2018-11-15T14:29:41" />
        <text id="201811156780b10b8b94414680000392">
          <timeStamp time="2018-11-15T14:29:41" />
          <by role="member" id="2742">The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (Minister for Human Services) (14:29):</by>  I think the honourable member once again demonstrates that the Labor Party doesn't understand what is taking place with the NDIS. Prior to the full rollout, which was due to take place on 30 June this year, the South Australian government was responsible for the regulation of disability services. That has now transferred to the Quality and Safeguards Commission, as of 1 July.</text>
        <page num="2147" />
        <text id="201811156780b10b8b94414680000393">Our advice, as I said in my substantive response, is that we understand from legal advice that the Community Visitor Scheme does not have jurisdiction to continue to compulsorily enter services, or without the willingness of the provider, although a number of providers have, and the CBS has reported to us that most providers are more than happy for the community visitor to continue to enter premises because they certainly see it as a value-added role as issues are often identified through the scheme that they weren't aware of. It has heretofore been completely funded by the state government. The federal government is responsible for the Quality and Safeguards Commission, which is its own agency.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>