<!--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="2020-06-03" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>54</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="901" />
  <endPage num="954" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Community Visitor Scheme</name>
      <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000244">
        <heading>Community Visitor Scheme</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4697" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. K.J. MAHER</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2020-06-03">
            <name>Community Visitor Scheme</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2020-06-03T15:01:11" />
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000245">
          <timeStamp time="2020-06-03T15:01:11" />
          <by role="member" id="4697">The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Leader of the Opposition) (15:01):</by>  My question is to the Minister for Human Services regarding conflicts of interest. Minister, when the Public Advocate was appointed as the Principal Community Visitor, were any concerns raised or did you as minister think to seek any advice about actual or perceived conflicts of interest between the roles?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="2742" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Human Services</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2020-06-03">
            <name>Community Visitor Scheme</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2020-06-03T15:01:38" />
        <page num="913" />
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000246">
          <timeStamp time="2020-06-03T15:01:38" />
          <by role="member" id="2742">The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (Minister for Human Services) (15:01):</by>  I thank the honourable member for his question. I would like to, with the indulgence of the chamber, just remind people of the origin of the Community Visitor Scheme. In 2004-05, there was a report commissioned, which was done by a gentleman by the name of Ian Bidmeade who did a review into the Mental Health Act, entitled 'Paving the Way', in which he recommended that a community visitor scheme be established in South Australia. Yes, it was 2005. I'm reading from the <term>Hansard</term> of 30 April 2009. In his comments in relation to his recommendation that the then government establish a community visitor scheme for mental health, he says:</text>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000247">
          <inserted>One obvious issue in a small state like South Australia is whether the people involved in such schemes could play other roles, such as advocacy, or assistance to consumers coming before the Guardianship Board. Another is whether the visitors should be looking at standards of care, or be more focused on a personal supportive relationship with individual consumers. We support any such scheme being housed with the Public Advocate to emphasise advocacy and synergy with other advocacy roles.</inserted>
        </text>
        <text continued="true" id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000248">The person who read that into the record on 30 April 2009 was myself at which time I moved for the establishment of the first Community Visitor Scheme in South Australia, and the government at the time opposed those amendments.</text>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000249">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000250">
          <by role="office">The PRESIDENT:</by>  Order!</text>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000251">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000252">
          <by role="office">The PRESIDENT:</by>  Order! Government benches, please; I can't hear the minister.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="2742" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000253">
          <by role="member" id="2742">The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK:</by>  The government at the time opposed those amendments. That was the clear direction that was provided by Mr Bidmeade in that report. We took his advice in the Liberal Party and proudly and, I might add, along with the advocacy of organisations like the Mental Health Coalition—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4363" kind="interjection">
        <name>The Hon. T.A. Franks</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000254">
          <by role="member" id="4363">The Hon. T.A. Franks:</by>  The Mental Health Coalition, where I was the policy officer at the time lobbying for this.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="2742" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000255">
          <by role="member" id="2742">The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK:</by>  Yes, the Hon. Tammy Franks reminds me—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000256">
          <by role="office">The PRESIDENT:</by>  The Hon. Ms Franks, you are interjecting out of order.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="2742" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000257">
          <by role="member" id="2742">The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK:</by>  —in an out of order manner—that she was the policy officer. I think there were probably a range of other organisations that were advocating for that as well. That was the advice then. I'm quite happy to go and check the records to see whether any specific individuals or organisations raised concerns about a potential conflict of interest, but we believe that there are natural synergies. It is the Minister for Health's responsibility to determine who the Principal Community Visitor is, but we believe that there are synergies with the role because we are dealing with the state's most vulnerable people, that is, people under guardianship. These are people who don't have family and friends.</text>
        <text id="202006030fd4d29cbd084f2980000258">The term that's often used—that very unfortunate term—is guardian of last resort. These people don't have the capacity to advocate for themselves. They don't have friends and they don't have family. In fact, we extended the Community Visitor Scheme last year to enable the Principal Community Visitor to visit those people, because we think they are an incredibly important cohort for both roles to be able to advocate for.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>