Legislative Council Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1) 54 1 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Motions MATES in Construction MATES in Construction Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. C.M. Scriven: 1.	That this council notes that— (a)	males in the building and construction industry are twice as likely to commit suicide than males in other jobs; (b)	males in the building and construction industry are six times more likely to die through suicide than in a workplace accident; (c)	between 2001 and 2015, there were 3,000 construction deaths by suicide, with 2,958 being males and 42 females; (d)	every two days in Australia, a construction worker takes their own life; and (e)	suicide kills more men than the total of workplace accidents and road accidents combined. 2.	That this council acknowledges the valuable work done by MATES in Construction to— (a)	reduce suicide in the construction industry and promote health and wellbeing; (b)	raise awareness about suicide; and (c)	make it easier to access help that is practical, professional and appropriate. 3.	That this council notes that the Construction Industry Training Board recently cut the $50,000 funding it previously provided to MATES in Construction and refused a funding request of $150,000. 4.	That this council condemns the heartless and short-sighted decision to cut the funding and calls on the government to make an ongoing funding commitment of at least $150,000 per annum to MATES in Construction for this life-saving initiative. (Continued from 16 October 2019.) The Hon. J.E. HANSON Legislative Council The Hon. J.E. HANSON (16:59): I rise to speak in support of this motion and I want to start, as I do so, giving a bit of insight on a particular case which I think is quite relevant. In August 2015, a guy called Shannon received a call from his mum saying that she needed to talk to him. At the time, Shannon was at work and said, 'Can't it wait? I am a bit busy.' His mum said, 'I have something really important to tell you. I need you to get someone with you to hear this. Get a colleague in the room with you.' Shannon, confused about what was happening, approached a staff member and he explained the situation. They put the call on speaker and his mother then broke the news to him that his brother had taken his own life. Shannon's colleague acted quickly, organised a flight home and assured Shannon that he would not need to worry about work. Three hours later, Shannon arrived home where he was faced with his family and probably a head full of unanswered questions. During this same period, Shannon was experiencing several personal struggles in his own life. He was in a fly in-fly out situation. He was obviously stressed by work, family and his job security. He has explained that, at the time, he was thinking about everyone else and that really burdened him. It stripped him of his energy and left him feeling depressed. Fortunately, Shannon sought help. He received both private and work-provided counselling. But about the same time, MATES in Construction started training on site. Shannon volunteered to become a Connector. As he put it, he asked himself the question, 'If I am feeling like this, who else is feeling this way?' Shannon felt that he had something to offer and he needed to give back to his work community. He received ongoing support from his field officer for his own struggles and in supporting others. To date, at least today as far as I am aware, Shannon helps others as he continues to support and connect mates doing it tough with MATES in Construction. Sadly, the story of Shannon is not unusual at all. The fact is that construction workers—and I think we are going to hear this a fair bit in this debate—are six times more likely to die from suicide than in an accident at work. Furthermore, these figures could be inaccurate because generally there is an underreporting of suicide that can go up to about 20 per cent. On average, 190 Australians working in the construction industry take their own lives each year. I think we are going to hear that a fair bit, too. This means, just on the maths of that, we lose a construction worker every second day. General Awareness Training—which is usually delivered on construction sites, for instance, like the one where Shannon worked—outlines the problem of suicide and mental health in the South Australian construction and allied industries, they help provide guidance to recognise the signs of a person at risk and explain how they could connect with other people in the workplace to help them. The MATES in Construction program aims to provide General Awareness Training to everyone who works in construction and allied industries, including both on-site and office staff. To date, over 15,000 people have received that training, which means that they there are now thousands of volunteers on construction sites all across Australia who are trained to recognise the signs when perhaps a co-worker is not well. We can also look beyond the subjective and anecdotal cases like I have outlined with Shannon and we can look at those to find out how any cut to MATES in Construction, or MATES, as I like to term it, is going to have a devastating effect in the industry toward the aims of suicide prevention. A report was completed by the Australian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention called 'A qualitative evaluation of the effectiveness of the MATES in Construction program'. It is a very descriptive title and it is exactly what it is about. This report—and I encourage members to read it—highlighted that volunteers have a very positive perception of the MATES in Construction program. For instance, one participant stated: I had very old-fashioned views about suicide and people—probably not the most supportive. The training brought me right out of that…and really made me realise how in general terms someone would get to a position like that and [how] successful help could be at the right times if people were keeping an eye out for each other. When discussing their experiences with other volunteers, participants in the study stressed that they would feel confident turning to other volunteers in that program to seek help. Key aspects that are considered central to the success of MATES in Construction were the simplicity of the model, clear roles for volunteers, and a strong perception of MATES in Construction within industry. As one participant to the survey said: I like the whole model. The fact that you train everyone to recognise the signs and the subtle invitations—and that empowers someone to be a better mate. The report commends MATES in Construction, it commends those who are workers in case management. There was a clear picture in the report given of the types of problems they face working in the industry. They understood that there were key pressures such as time pressures, lack of job security, family and relationship problems. All these things affect workers in the construction industry, and MATES in Construction were considered effective in delivering prompt and regular contact, follow-up, and understanding of those issues. I go through all that because, to put it simply, there is no need to reinvent the wheel here. MATES in Construction is a great program. Making cuts to it does not make any sense, and any reasonable government or minister would see that. Any reasonable government or minister would look at an industry, or the industry here, and look to the results we are getting out of MATES in Construction and see that there is support for MATES in Construction. Any reasonable minister would know that MATES in Construction is funded interstate by state governments—and, indeed, by the federal government. Any reasonable minister would tell this Premier that the funding really should not be cut—that is, unless the minister had some other reason for making these cuts, perhaps based on some sort of ideology. Members would be right, though, in questioning what kind of ideology it is that brings about a result where cuts are made to a successful suicide prevention service—and, even more so, callously or ignorantly making those cuts during a suicide prevention week; I repeat, during a suicide prevention week. Shame on any minister who does that. I note in the debate on this motion that there are some proposed amendments from the government, and I am more than happy to support point 1 of the amendment, which underlines the seriousness of what we are debating here today, because people are dying. I cannot support any other such amendment which, frankly, seems written to present a more palatable version of history than what has occurred here, which was a cut to a suicide intervention program during Suicide Prevention Week. These cuts will place more pressure on a pre-existing excellent service. MATES in Construction is not some sort of fly-by-the-seat operation. They are well established and are supported by industry bodies and industry participants, from unions to employers. The fact is that cutting funding to MATES falls firmly into the category of being so heartless that it is, frankly, quite bizarre. Trying to whitewash that will not work with me, and it should not work with anyone else here either. The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins Legislative Council The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins: Why don't you sit down. You don't know what you're talking about. The Hon. J.E. HANSON Legislative Council The Hon. J.E. HANSON: I will not sit down, Mr Dawkins. It may arise during debate here, but I am uncertain whether the new funding that the amendments reference is even new funding per se or if it is simply funding that had already been allocated previous to now. A check of the SA Health website seems to reveal that it may indeed be pre-existing funding. To quote the Office of the Chief Psychiatrist: Since 2014 the SA government has provided $150,000 per year to support state suicide prevention projects and activities through the SA Suicide Prevention Grant Scheme. I am happy to provide evidence of what I just read out if anyone wishes to see it but, for my money, it looks like the attempt to make this look like new funding is another tricky attempt to cover up the callous nature of making cuts to suicide prevention during Suicide Prevention Week. To think that no-one might check if this was pre-existing funding also speaks volumes. Maybe the minister was behind that decision, too. In any event, there would be no need for amendments to a motion condemning cuts to suicide prevention, of course, if the cuts had not been made in the first place. I am also certain that these cuts cannot be supported by all those on the government benches; in fact, I am very certain of that. I am certain that there are at least some—clearly a minority but at least some—members on the bench in this place and the other who were probably and still are quite dismayed by the cuts callously applied during Suicide Prevention Week. Those members must have been wondering what the minister was thinking. Not for the first time, perhaps they were wondering if the minister was thinking at all, but I am sure that members here, and maybe even members of the government who may be speaking on this motion, will privately, behind closed doors, be questioning not only this move by the minister but many other moves he has made that led to this. They will be questioning the minister's judgement and they should, but the time to make such feelings known behind closed doors is over. Clearly, there is a need to show that cuts like these to suicide prevention are against the principles that some on the government's own backbench, and maybe even their front bench, espouse and stand for. Clearly, there is a need to show that trying to relabel the cuts with amendments that reference pre-existing funding also stands against those principles. I call on those members who are so offended by these cuts, and moves to hide them, to stand by the courage of their convictions here today and support the original motion to condemn the cuts, and seek to reinstate those much-needed funds. I call on them to not be bullied or cowed by a foolish minister or anyone else foolishly supporting cuts, possibly driven by ideology or possibly by poor decisions of mates appointed to roles to do dirty jobs. Suicide prevention, quite simply, is too important to become a political football for a minister and his lackeys. The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins Legislative Council The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins: Gee whiz! The Hon. J.E. HANSON Legislative Council The Hon. J.E. HANSON: Gee whiz indeed, Mr Dawkins. The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins Legislative Council The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins: A political football—you are doing that exactly. The Hon. J.E. HANSON Legislative Council The Hon. J.E. HANSON: Is that right, Mr Dawkins? I am making it a political football? Am I the person who appoints my mates to boards? Have a think about that, Mr Dawkins. We all need members here today to show the levels of concern that we should have about what is actually occurring here because lives are literally at stake. These cuts can be stopped—not amended, stopped—and they should be stopped. To put it quite bluntly, let's stop them. The Hon. T.A. FRANKS Legislative Council The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (17:12): I rise to support the motion and support the fine work of MATES in Construction. It is an organisation that has long been known to me. When I worked for the Mental Health Coalition, I was privileged to attend a toolbox meeting in Queensland as part of a national program of awareness, well before it came to South Australia in fact. I was delighted to see South Australia take up this program, and I have been a strong supporter of it. There is a great need for MATES in Construction. There is a great need for tailor-made suicide prevention programs. There is also a great need to prioritise suicide prevention and to keep it from becoming a political football. I think that the Marshall government, in appointing the Hon. John Dawkins as the Premier's envoy on suicide prevention, has shown great leadership, and I have great faith that the Hon. John Dawkins will ensure that this government does its utmost for suicide prevention. I am heartily disappointed that the original motion contained the words 'commit suicide', as if the person who dies by suicide is a criminal, as if that person deserves to be treated as somehow lesser, and I do so as somebody who has a brother who died by suicide and a father who died by suicide. I will not sit in this chamber and see suicide prevention used to score political points. I opposed the Construction Industry Training Board changes. I support this motion with amendments, and I support all players playing not the man but the ball and not turning this into a game. The Hon. F. PANGALLO Legislative Council The Hon. F. PANGALLO (17:14): I rise to speak on the motion. I point out that the opposition accused SA-Best, at one point, of being blinded by ideology. I think Labor is being a bit cute when they throw that label around, considering their unwavering support for the union movement. We would like to acknowledge the strong advocacy and work that has been done by MATES in Construction. Both myself and my colleague Connie Bonaros were extremely disappointed and disturbed at the Hon. Clare Scriven's attempts to diminish the excellent work in suicide prevention being undertaken by the Hon. John Dawkins. His unwavering commitment to this cause is unquestionable, and we are sure that it will result in much better outcomes for mental health as well as go a long way to reducing the suicide rate. As for MATES in Construction, we understood that the Hon. Clare Scriven did not consult with them about her motion. If she had, perhaps this debate may have taken a different course than the politicised one we now have on this very sensitive topic. I will say that we, too, were initially shocked when we learned that funding would be cut, particularly when we were led to believe by the minister that the association of MATES in Construction and the Construction Industry Training Board would continue. The most disturbing aspect of it was that the decision was made in Suicide Prevention Week. That was an extremely poor move. Since then, we have sought answers and we are satisfied with the responses we have received from the government. In short, MATES in Construction does indeed benefit from significant funding from both the federal and state governments. It also has very significant resources of its own at its disposal. They can apply for funding from the South Australian Suicide Prevention Community Grants Scheme. The Department for Innovation and Skills is continuing to work with MATES in Construction to investigate funding and develop a pilot project under Skilling South Australia. I also note that unions or employee associations do not contribute to the funding of MATES in Construction. In closing, while we certainly endorse the strong work that has been done and continues to be done by MATES in Construction on this very important and sensitive issue of suicide and suicide prevention, we will be supporting the amendments of the Hon. John Dawkins. The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS Legislative Council The Hon. J.S.L. DAWKINS (17:18): In the first instance, I move to amend the motion as follows: Paragraph 1—Leave out 'commit' and insert 'die by' Paragraph 3—Leave out paragraph 3 and insert new paragraph as follows: 3.	Acknowledges state government funding of $150,000 a year through the Office of the Chief Psychiatrist to support state suicide prevention projects and activities through the South Australian Suicide Prevention Community Grants Scheme; and Paragraph 4—Leave out paragraph 4 and insert new paragraph as follows: 4.	Notes that the government is investigating funding opportunities with a pilot project for MATES in Construction through Skilling South Australia. I thank the Hon. Ms Scriven for her interest in suicide prevention and, although I did not know he was going to speak today, I thank the Hon. Mr Hanson for his interest in the area. I would give them, perhaps, the benefit of my long experience in this area. When I first took up suicide prevention in this parliament, there was no state government funding whatsoever for suicide prevention. The first programs that were brought to this state were brought from Tasmania by me with the assistance of local community money. The state government, going back a number of ministers ago, would not put any money in. I worked constructively with the then government over many years, moving motions in this place and getting colleagues to move motions in the other place, and I think we progressively got a lot done. There was the first strategy on suicide prevention that was developed and there was the work out of the Office of the Chief Psychiatrist to start the first of the many suicide prevention networks that we now see in South Australia. Those who listened to my matter of interest earlier would know that there are close to 40 of them and we are working very hard to get many more. When I got some progress, I just worked a bit harder with the then government and I got more action. So just a word of advice to my colleagues across the way: if you want to be really beneficial to suicide prevention, please do not play political games. I do not see the Hon. Ms Scriven's motion as a political game, but the Hon. Mr Hanson's contribution today was completely unhelpful to suicide prevention. Having said all that, I have had a long association with MATES in Construction—longer than any member in this place—and I have worked with them constructively over many years. To say I was disappointed with the cuts, which I did not find out about until it was in the media on the Saturday morning after R U OK Day, is without question. On behalf of the Premier's Council on Suicide Prevention, which expressed concerns, particularly about the timing, I have written to the Construction Industry Training Board in regard to that. If I can speak briefly to the amendments. As has been mentioned earlier, the first amendment is to leave out the word 'commit' and insert the words 'die by'. In my matter of interest today, I did go to some length to not only explain the reasons why the word 'commit' is not one that is accepted in the suicide prevention sector but also to do that with a number of other words and phrases. A lot of work has been done by Everymind across Australia to develop a code of the way in which words should be used. I encourage members to read that material and if they want more information I am happy to provide it. In regard to the amendment of paragraph 3, the new paragraph talks about the funding through the Office of the Chief Psychiatrist for state suicide prevention projects and activities through the grants scheme. However, I think it is also worth acknowledging the terrific efforts that we are getting right across government, through all of the government agencies and departments, and some of them that are probably less likely to be involved in this area than would have been expected. That work through the issues group on suicide prevention I am very pleased with and proud of. That work and the broad community effort towards suicide prevention, coming from all sorts of organisations, is one that was remarked upon only two days ago in the Old Chamber when I hosted the national round table on Suicide Prevention Task Force. The work that is being done in South Australia is being well taken up by many other jurisdictions. Indeed, an Australian professor at a Japanese university was recently here. He is being funded by the Japanese government to develop a strategy for suicide countermeasures in Japan and he came here expressly to have a look at our model and has even flippantly, I think, suggested that he could ask for an Emperor's council on suicide prevention. The amendment to paragraph 4 removes the condemning words. I was disappointed in that paragraph. The amended paragraph states that the government is working with MATES in Construction for other opportunities, and I think MATES in Construction welcomes that. While I understand that MATES in Construction was advised that there may be a motion in the parliament from the opposition, they never saw the content of this motion until after it was moved. I think that is another lesson that members opposite might learn. If you are going to sponsor a motion that is around or with an NGO, or a body that is in the community, it is not a bad idea to actually discuss the words with them, because MATES in Construction do not want to play politics, they do not want to be Labor or Liberal, or union and employer, and they have been very successful over a long period because they have not done that. A great example of the work they do with other NGOs, with government agencies, in Mental Health Week was the From the Ground Up breakfast, which was held at the Civil Contractors Federation and which I was pleased to attend. MATES in Construction, in conjunction with the Mental Health Coalition, SafeWork SA and ReturnToWorkSA, put on an excellent breakfast event, attended by many people from across the construction industry. It was addressed by Nathan Bolton, an outstanding young armed forces veteran, who is a member of the Premier's Council on Suicide Prevention. I think that is the sort of thing that MATES in Construction does so very well. I am very privileged to have worked with a group like that. The government funding is a small element of what they work with, but I will be working with MATES in Construction for a long time, I hope, to advance the way they work. I think I mentioned in the chamber, when the Hon. Ms Scriven asked me some questions a number of weeks ago, that in a community in the Mid North that has been impacted significantly by suicide, MATES in Construction is working through funding from the Country SA PHN, a federal body, to make sure that that community has the benefits of the proven work of MATES in Construction. The broad nature of what that body does is something that has been overlooked by some members opposite. With those words, I commend the amendments to the council. The Hon. J.A. DARLEY Legislative Council The Hon. J.A. DARLEY (17:28): For the record, I will be supporting the Hon. John Dawkins' amendment. The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN Legislative Council The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (17:28): I thank the Hon. Mr Hanson for his contribution, particularly in regard to the importance of MATES in Construction. I think he very admirably put the case about how important it is and, despite the debate we are having here at the moment, I think something on which we can agree is that MATES in Construction is extremely important. In the prevention of suicide they play a key role and that key role should be supported, that key role should be honoured and that key role should indeed be expanded. I also acknowledge the contributions of the Hon. Tammy Franks, the Hon. Frank Pangallo and the Hon. John Dawkins. I am disappointed that there is an amendment that attempts to hide the fact that the CITB cut $50,000 of funding to MATES in Construction. That is the key point, and to have an amendment that attempts to ignore that, attempts to whitewash that, I think is very disappointing. The amendment that is proposed refers to the South Australian Suicide Prevention Community Grants Scheme. I am very glad that has been in existence since 2014. I am very glad that that continues to be in existence—I trust that we will not see that cut. However, I would point out that that was existing funding. The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins Legislative Council The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins: It only existed because of me. The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN Legislative Council The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am very glad that the Hon. Mr Dawkins worked very hard on that. He mentions that it was because of him. I am very happy to acknowledge his role in that and that it came in under a Labor government with, obviously, the very good work of the Hon. Mr Dawkins. However, that scheme provides grants of between $500 and $10,000 per annum. The cut by the CITB to MATES in Construction was $50,000. In fact, I understand that the need was for $150,000 to give some certainty of funding going forward. To talk about existing funding that has already been there as though it can somehow replace $50,000 that has been taken out of MATES in Construction is simply not acceptable. I am very happy to accept the first amendment that is being proposed by the Hon. Mr Dawkins, which is to rephrase 'commit' and instead put 'die by'. I am happy to acknowledge that his experience in this area, as with the experience of others, means that that is the appropriate term. Certainly, no offence was intended by that wrongful term, and I am happy to admit that that was a wrongful term. 'Died by suicide' is the appropriate wording, so we will be supporting that amendment. However, the remaining amendments indicate that we will note that the government is investigating funding opportunities. Everything we have heard today clearly shows that we do not need to investigate further funding opportunities. We need further funds. We have had a loss of funds because of the CITB cut. We need far more than saying, 'But we have got some other existing funding and we are investigating other opportunities.' What I had hoped this motion would achieve was that there would actually be a commitment from the government, a commitment that would have meant that I could withdraw this motion. That would have been the best outcome from this motion. The fact that that has not occurred is indeed disappointing. I need to reflect on a couple of comments made by the Hon. Mr Frank Pangallo. I do not see how he considers that I have diminished the Hon. John Dawkins' role in any way. I will quote from my previous contribution, where, referring to the removal of people who have workers' interests at heart from the board of the CITB, I said: I do not think for a moment that it was the intention of the SA-Best members or the Hon. Mr Darley that part of the result of that decision would be that funding to MATES in Construction would be cut… Far from trying to be political, I think it was incredibly fair to say, 'I do not think'. I did not think that and I do not think now that that was ever part of their intention; however, the fact remains that it was the result of that decision. The second amendment that is being moved by the Hon. Mr Dawkins leaves out the paragraph that talks about the cut. That is a whitewash and it should not be accepted by anyone in this chamber. It leaves out the condemnation of the decision. I do not think that is playing political football; I think that decision should be condemned. I think it is outrageous that $50,000 in funding has been cut from a very important suicide prevention mechanism. So I do not see any problem whatsoever in condemning that cut. Again, I am very disappointed to hear that there are people in this chamber who do not condemn that cut and who do not see a problem with that funding being removed. I therefore encourage members, despite what they might have indicated so far and whilst accepting the first amendment of the Hon. Mr Dawkins, to reject the second two amendments and then to support this motion going forward. The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: Honourable members, I have a number of questions to put to the chamber. The first is that the amendment to paragraph 1, moved by the Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins, be agreed to. Question agreed to. The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: I will inform the members of what the second question is before I put it. It is that paragraph 3, as proposed to be struck out by the Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins, stand as part of the motion. If you support the Hon. Mr Dawkins, you vote in the negative, for the noes, and if you support the Hon. Ms Scriven's position, you vote in the affirmative, for the ayes. Ayes	7 Noes	12 Majority	5 AYES Bourke, E.S. Hanson, J.E. Hunter, I.K. Ngo, T.T. Pnevmatikos, I. Scriven, C.M. (teller) Wortley, R.P. NOES Darley, J.A. Dawkins, J.S.L. (teller) Franks, T.A. Hood, D.G.E. Lee, J.S. Lensink, J.M.A. Lucas, R.I. Pangallo, F. Parnell, M.C. Ridgway, D.W. Stephens, T.J. Wade, S.G. PAIRS Maher, K.J. Bonaros, C. The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: The next question is that the new paragraph 3 as proposed to be inserted by the Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins be so inserted. This question has been put in the positive, so if you support Mr Dawkins you will vote in the affirmative; if you support the Hon. Ms Scriven you will vote in the negative. Question agreed to. The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: I go to the next question, that paragraph 4, as proposed to be struck out by the Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins, stand as part of the motion. If you support the Hon. Ms Scriven you vote in the affirmative; if you support the Hon. Mr Dawkins you vote for the noes. Ayes	7 Noes	12 Majority	5 AYES Bourke, E.S. Hanson, J.E. Hunter, I.K. Ngo, T.T. Pnevmatikos, I. Scriven, C.M. (teller) Wortley, R.P. NOES Darley, J.A. Dawkins, J.S.L. (teller) Franks, T.A. Hood, D.G.E. Lee, J.S. Lensink, J.M.A. Lucas, R.I. Pangallo, F. Parnell, M.C. Ridgway, D.W. Stephens, T.J. Wade, S.G. PAIRS Maher, K.J. Bonaros, C. The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: The next question is that new paragraph 4 as proposed to be inserted by the Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins be so inserted. Question agreed to; motion as amended carried.