Mental Health Services

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (14:40): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a question of the Minister for Human Services regarding housing services.

Leave granted.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: The Adelaide Zero project released during Connections Week in May showed 227 people in the Adelaide CBD sleeping rough compared to 143 12 months ago—a 40 per cent increase in rough sleeping in quite a short time frame. Due to the transfer of funds to the NDIS, community mental health programs have received a 25 per cent reduction in funding across the board, regardless of whether their particular client base will be transferring to the NDIS or not. My question to the minister is: what impact will the 25 per cent reduction to community mental health services have on vulnerable people, especially those experiencing housing stress or homelessness?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (Minister for Human Services) (14:41): I thank the honourable member for her question because it gives me the great opportunity to correct a number of the inaccuracies that the Labor Party has been peddling on these two issues: both the mental health issue and the number of rough sleepers who have been identified through Connections Week.

If I can turn, first of all, to the matter of the NDIS. As my honourable colleague, the Minister for Health and Wellbeing, yesterday stated, we may need to speak quite slowly to explain these matters for the Labor opposition. The National Disability Insurance Scheme is a radical transformation in the way that services are being funded throughout Australia. The agreements were signed, the bilateral agreements, which have led to the cashing out of services that have heretofore been funded through the South Australian government to the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

I would like an explanation, which the honourable member may like to address through a supplementary, about whether the Labor Party still supports the National Disability Insurance Scheme, given that former prime minister Julia Gillard has stated that it is one of her proudest pieces of public policy. One of the Labor candidates, who was my local candidate in the electorate of Mayo, Mr Reg Coutts, had stated in his brochures that were sent to all of our constituents that one of the things he was extremely proud of in terms of Labor's achievements—

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Point of order: relevance. Candidates for various seats have nothing to do with people who are, sadly, homeless or sleeping rough and whether the cuts to services will affect them.

The PRESIDENT: I get the point of order. The ministers have some latitude but, minister, please keep it to point. I am very keen to give the crossbenchers a reasonable go.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I would take issue with the point of order, because these matters are connected.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: I haven't upheld the point of order; all I have done is point out to you the concerns of the Hon. Ms Scriven, saying please get to the point. I am conscious that yesterday we didn't get—I'm anxious to get to as many crossbenchers' questions as I can today—

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Yes, I appreciate that, Mr President.

The PRESIDENT: —being the Thursday, so I would appreciate, although it is within your discretion, a concise and relevant answer.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Mr President, that is a difficult thing to do, trying to explain the NDIS in question time after question time after question time, and indeed—

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: Minister, just go on, please.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Trying to determine whether the South Australian Labor Party supports choice and control for participants in the NDIS is a question that I think is very concerning. It is incredibly concerning because it is the premise of the National Disability Insurance Scheme that their federal colleagues have repeatedly said was a crowning achievement of the former federal Labor government, which is now being constantly undermined by the South Australian Labor Party.

I have responded in terms of disability services and I am happy to respond in terms of mental health services, but services which have been funded by the South Australian government are being cashed out to the National Disability Insurance Scheme. So we can have a flow chart. We have a person who is currently funded by a South Australian mental health service.

First question is: are they an NDIS recipient? Yes. What is in their plan? They then choose their service provider. If they are not an NDIS recipient, they continue to receive services from the South Australian-funded mental health services. It is as simple as that. It is not a cut. The second issue that I would like to address is the inaccurate use of data through the Adelaide Zero Project by-name list. What we are comparing is that—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Mr President, I am so sick of these bozos opposite just banging on. They continuously talk throughout questions. Are they actually interested in an answer? Have they ever learnt any manners?

The PRESIDENT: Minister, it is your option to sit down if you wish.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I would like to answer, but I would like to be heard in silence, just as a fairly basic courtesy.

The Hon. E.S. BOURKE: Point of order: is that really appropriate language to call us bozos on this side of the—is it very parliamentary?

The PRESIDENT: It has been a long week. We are not having a debate on who's a bozo and who's not a bozo. Alright? Minister.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: I would like to continue.

Members interjecting:

The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Ms Bourke, the Hon. Mr Hanson, if we can just restrain ourselves. We sat late last night. The minister actually wants to attempt to answer the question. Show her the courtesy.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The Labor Party's misuse of the data from the Adelaide Zero Project is also, again, inappropriate. The by-name list is a cumulative total which is collected over a 12-month period. If we actually want to compare apples with apples more accurately, the 2018 Connections Week identified 148 rough sleepers; in 2019, it identified in that period 119.

Also, because they had learnt from last year, they split up the regions that they were examining into smaller regions so that they had the option of finding more people. They also did an additional night. So, from memory, they went out for one night last year and this time they went out for two nights, so they increased the opportunity to find people who are rough sleeping. So, 2018, 148 rough sleepers; 2019, 119 rough sleepers.

The Labor Party don't understand very basic data and these things, which may be by design or maybe they need some re-education program but, in either case, they deliberately misuse information, they deliberately scare the most vulnerable people in South Australia and it is despicable.