HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2017-11-14 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Auditor-General's Report

Auditor-General's Report

In committee.

(Continued from 2 November 2017.)

The CHAIR: We are looking at the Minister for Education and Child Development and the Minister for Higher Education and Skills. The member for Adelaide, you have questions. Is there any particular portfolio area that you are going to ask questions on?

Ms SANDERSON: Yes, my questions will be coming from the Auditor-General's Report on the Department for Child Protection, Part B, Agency audit reports, starting at page 59.

The CHAIR: Are they all on that section?

Ms SANDERSON: Yes. My first question refers to page 61, communication of audit matters. Given that until recently the department was not complying with the drug testing required in section 20, part 2, of the now repealed Children's Protection Act 1993 or the reporting requirement to parliament as referenced in the inquest regarding Chloe Valentine, with all the new legislation that affects the department, without a legal compliance process in place how will the minister ensure staff on the ground are firstly aware of the changes and are correctly implementing them?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: We appointed a head of legal services in May, which was a crucial appointment to make sure that we are being adequately responsive on legal compliance. There is a draft legal compliance framework currently under discussion in the department and about to be considered for finalisation by the executive of the department . We expect that to be in place by the end of November.

Ms SANDERSON: I now refer you to page 72, expenses. Can the minister explain why there has been a huge increase in the cost of commercial care, from $37 million in the 2013-14 year to $126.6 million three years later, representing a 242 per cent increase?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: As the member will be well aware, we have seen a large increase in the number of young people who are unfortunately in out-of-home care due to the incapacity of their families to look after them. To give some sense of the scale of the increase, from 2014-15 to 2015-16 we saw a 14.3 per cent increase in the number of young people in out-of-home care, and from 2015-16 to 2016-17 a further 8 per cent increase.

While we have seen a steady increase in the number of young people who are able to be placed in kinship or foster care, that has not been able to keep pace with the number of young people who have come into out-of-home care. In addition, while I do not have figures here with me, the length of time that a young person stays in out-of-home care has extended, so unfortunately we are picking up children younger and they are under longer orders.

What that has all combined to do is put enormous pressure on placements. Without having been able to increase the number of placements in family-based care to the extent that we would have liked (although, as I said, it has increased), the only alternative is to pay people to care for children. That has been largely through the residential care facilities run by the department. There are some residential care places that are run by non-government organisations, and of course we have resorted to the use of shift-work commercial care in some instances. We are working very hard on reducing the extent of that.

The answer to why we are spending more is evident in the increased demand and the need for us to continue to increase the number of foster care and kinship care family-based placements. We have been working very hard to do that. As I say, we have seen increases, but unfortunately as yet not sufficient to more than compensate for the number of additional young people coming into our care.

Ms SANDERSON: Does the minister think that, as you have just outlined, an increase of 14.3 per cent in one year and then 8 per cent, totalling 22.3 per cent, should then give a 242 per cent increase in the cost of commercial care? Whilst there is an increase, they do not seem comparable in any way.

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: You are not comparing apples to oranges. There is an increase in the overall pool of the number of kids in care. The relatively small number of young people who were in residential care has absorbed a disproportionate amount of that increase of 22 per cent; therefore, you have seen a dramatic increase. I am not sure what other explanation there could be for this increase. We are not spending more on paying our staff. We are not using the money for other purposes; we are using the money to house young people.

There is an additional expense associated with young people who have significant disabilities, and there are some young people in that situation who are expensive. I do not for a minute—and I am sure no South Australian would for a minute—not want to spend the money on those young people who need nursing care around the clock. Depending on the composition of the young people who are in non family-based care, that can significantly change the amount of money being spent on that part of our budget from year to year.

Ms SANDERSON: On 6 February 2016, the minister announced an investment of $9 million to increase the number of foster carers by at least 130 and reduce the need for temporary commercial accommodation. That was 21 months ago. Almost two-thirds of the way through that policy, what is the net increase in foster carers since the $9 million was announced?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: Because I have given you figures on the increase in the number of young people in care over the period from 2014 to the end of June this year, I will do the same with the increase in kinship care and in foster care to give a sense of the increases that we have seen. These are not foster carers or kinship carers: they are placements of children, so there are two ways of measuring. From 2014-15 to 2015-16, we saw an increase of 16.5 per cent of placements in kinship care and from 2015-16 to 2016-17 a further 6.7 per cent increase. With foster carers, we have seen from 2014-15 to 2015-16 an increase of 8.9 per cent and from 2015-16 to 2016-17 a 6 per cent increase. So we have seen a steady increase.

The last figures I have for the number of carers who had a placement are not up to date, so I am not able to give you the final figures. Forgive me, I am misreading my own notes. The number of foster carers we had as at 30 June 2016 was 688. In 2016-17, so the end of 2017, the number was 730. So we have seen an increase in carers, both in the placements of children and in the number of carers. What we need, as everyone I think understands, are more and more children in placements where that is appropriate and safe for the children.

Ms SANDERSON: That is a net increase of 42 extra foster carers. Given that your goal is 130 in three years, how will you make up the difference? You are nearly 90 behind.

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: We are a third of the way through, but the fact is that our target is the target to have all children who can possibly live in family-based care in family-based care. That needs to increase. We should pay attention to the number of carers who are kinship carers. Being with kin, with people the children know, is very important and we have seen an increase in those numbers also—in fact, a larger increase in the number of placements with kinship carers.

We have recently, again, worked on attracting more people to the idea of being foster carers. We have gone to all public servants through a SAGEMS message and also a targeted message in the education department. We will be following that up. We think that people who are already working with children are more likely to consider using their skills to be foster carers.

Importantly, one of the challenges we have had is making sure that we are treating our foster carers in a way that means that they will speak well of the experience of fostering. There are foster carers who have not had a good experience, but they love the kids. They care, but they do not necessarily promote the idea to their friends, family and extended networks. It has been very important for us to work much more closely with foster carers and we have been working through the legislation that went through earlier this year on increasing the rights of foster carers.

We have recently appointed four people who are placed in the department to be liaisons for foster carers so that when they have a problem that they can not deal with with their immediate case manager, they will get the support that they need. We are also working with the non-government organisations who recruit foster carers on the ways in which we contract with those organisations to make sure that they are getting the right incentives to get more foster carers, but to get quality foster carers, and that they themselves are supporting carers. It is a multiple prong. The money that the member refers to was an advertising campaign and is part of it but is by no means the full effort that we are going to to increase both kinship and foster care placements.

Ms SANDERSON: Certainly I note that there have been a lot of ads and I am sure they have cost millions of dollars out of the $9 million. As you have identified, it is actually the treatment of the foster carers that is the issue. As recently as yesterday, I was notified of another foster carer who relinquished a child and was very upset to do so. I wrote to your office, and there has been no extra support. All the mother needed was support for that child, and now that child has been relinquished.

The child has a sibling who is also in danger if your department does not get onto this very quickly. I will resend it to you, as you look unsure. Issues have been raised, I bring them up with your office, and they need urgent attention. If you have two or four liaison people in the department, they have a lot of work cut out for them. It costs far more money for that breakdown in relationship if you do not put the supports in place and it is a lot worse for the child.

I am still on page 72. Given that in 2015-16 commercial care expenditure was $82.9 million, what miracle was the minister expecting when she budgeted for only $25.2 million for commercial care, which then ended up being $126.6 million?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: It was not the accurate figure to the budget, and that has subsequently been revised and dealt with. The department, in preparing a budget, tries to take account of what it believes will occur in demand and also what kind of options there are to meet that demand. We had engaged in a contract for 100 residential care places with non-government organisations, and there was hope that that would take the majority of the commercial care placements.

What became apparent over a period of time, though, was that that twin impact of more children needing to be placed in out-of-home care and children staying longer, which maximises the effect, was miscalculated. I say that not in criticism but in the recognition that it is very difficult to predict, in child protection, what will be required when, and also how often you will be able to place children with kinship.

The number of children who may have disabilities or significant behavioural disorders varies from year to year. Both of those triggers will often require accommodation and care that is not within a family. We rectified the amount of money that we needed to spend. The Treasurer has worked very closely with us to make sure that we were able to offer the services that we need to offer.

Ms SANDERSON: Is this the first time the minister has ever had to access money from the Governor's appropriation fund in any of you portfolio areas and, if so, how much?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I will take that on notice.

Ms SANDERSON: Does the minister also know how much is in the Governor's appropriation fund? I am not sure if that would be in your area.

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I imagine that is the province of the Treasurer.

Ms SANDERSON: I now refer to page 68, incidental payments. Can the minister explain how incidental expenses could possibly add up to $19 million in one year? What is the minister doing to ensure foster carers are receiving the correct loadings so the incidentals account is not used to this extent?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: As the member points out, the Auditor-General has drawn attention to incidentals and they cover a very wide variety of expenditure. The department is preparing to develop a policy in order to give better shape to that. I think the second question the member asked was about the carer payments and that has been the subject of very detailed work by the incoming chief finance officer as the new department has been formed in working with the contract arrangements with the non-government organisations to make sure that the payments are accurate and not causing grief and irritation to foster carers. An enormous amount of work is being done in the department at present.

Ms SANDERSON: Also on page 68 under 'Advance account previously used to provide a loan to a carer' regarding the $10,000 loan given to a carer, has the documentation now been found regarding the nature and circumstances of the loan? If so, what are they? What is the current balance? What are the processes now in place to ensure this does not happen again?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: We do not have the figures, so we will take that on notice.

Ms SANDERSON: Has the documentation at least been found, if you do not have the figures? Do you know what the loan was for?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I believe the department still has not found the original documentation. It dates from some time ago. They are seeking it, but the main thing is that we will give you a comprehensive answer on notice.

Ms SANDERSON: Page 68, as to the management of DCP's advance accounts needing to improve, have the 11 of the 20 advance accounts now been closed, as mentioned in the Auditor-General's Report? What policies has the minister put in place to ensure this also never happens again?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I am advised that those advance accounts are being progressively closed and that a credit card system is being put in place so that there will be no need for that kind of accounting.

Ms SANDERSON: Page 65, under 'Controls over payments to NGO service providers need to improve', related to the 10 non-government organisations, three of which were double paid when children moved out of commercial care into residential care. Can the minister guarantee that no children are being paid for twice at the moment? What systems are in place to ensure that does not happen?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I am advised that we now have a database constructed so that we are able to track every expenditure related to an individual child so that this should not happen again.

Ms SANDERSON: Page 64, as to invoices not being reviewed and checked for validity, regarding the sample done of six commercial care payments, it was found in five cases (which is a huge percentage) that the rates charged by service providers were not checked to contracted or quoted rates for accuracy by either the case worker or the business support officer before payment. Has this now been rectified? If so, how?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: We have instituted a program of extensive training for our staff and we have also instituted random checks to ensure quality.

Ms SANDERSON: I refer to page 69. A number of split transactions were paid using DCP purchase cards. In the Auditor-General's Report, people were splitting invoices so that they would be below the threshold so that they could use a credit card. What has the minister done to ensure splitting of transactions no longer occurs, who is checking this and how many cards have been cancelled since this due to misuse?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: The member will see in the last paragraph on page 69 that the Auditor-General has noted a number of improvements that have been made by the department in order to ensure that we have a sound system. While I understand that no credit cards have been revoked, there have been a number of warnings issued.

Ms SANDERSON: I refer to page 70, the ineffective review of key payroll reports. I note that ever since I have been doing this, since 2014, the bona fide reports and the annual leave have been mentioned in 2014, 2015, 2016 and again in 2017. What is the minister doing to ensure that changes are made?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: The department acknowledges that this is a real issue. It is one that occurs in some agencies, but obviously not all. They have been working hard not only to provide the right training environment or the right training effort so that the management is operating in a way that is consistent with the Auditor-General's requirements but also to improve the processes within the department.

The department has been in existence for just over a year and in that time has had to form the part of the department that is responsible for the corporate management. As those leaders have come in place and as staff have been appointed, there has been a very big effort to make sure that there is a diligent response to all issues, particularly those that have previously been raised by the Auditor-General. This is one that is still in process.

As the Auditor-General has noted in the report, there are interim measures that have been undertaken by the department, which is really about making sure that the managers are aware of their obligations. We will be working very hard over the next year so that when you are asking me questions next year or I am asking you questions next year there will be a more satisfactory response for the management of bona fides.

Ms SANDERSON: Just to be clear, in 2014 the agency's response to why the bona fide reports had not been checked as well was that the department would continue to remind managers and supervisors of the requirement to review outstanding BFRs in a timely manner. It was the same response in 2015. In 2016, it was noted that it still was not occurring, and there was a need to print out the reports. Are they still paper reports that are having to be printed out, or has it moved to online as it was expected to?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: We are moving at some stage in the not too distant future, sometime in the next several months, to fully implement CHRIS 21, which will enable us to be fully online. It is important, particularly for a very geographically dispersed department such as ours with many part-time workers, that we are automated as much as possible. We are expecting that that full implementation will make a significant improvement to our management of bona fides.

Ms SANDERSON: Last year, the response from the department was that existing procedures would be updated to include an internal escalation process and more frequent reviews of noncompliant sites and also to advise that sites would be informed that the process of certifying these reports can be delegated to other staff. Were those done and there is still a problem, or have these not been implemented yet?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: Those actions, I am advised, have been undertaken, but it will be when we are fully automated that you will see a significant improvement in the quality.

Ms SANDERSON: Still on page 70, the report for this year states:

Where BFCs and MLRs are not promptly checked, DCP has no assurance that only valid employees are paid, that employees are paid correctly or that leave balances recorded in Chris21 are accurate, impacting the reliability of associated liability balances.

Were they audited for the sake of the end-of-year balances that the Auditor-General has checked?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: It is standard for the Auditor-General to audit in order to be accurate in reporting. As I have said, there is no question that this is an issue for this department and that we have made progress, but not sufficient yet to be clear of concerns from the Auditor-General. We will be working diligently over the next year to improve that as this department gets on its feet as an independent department.

The CHAIR: The time having expired, we thank the member for Adelaide for her questions and the minister and her advisers for making themselves available. We ask that the Minister for Disabilities and the Minister Assisting the Minister for Recreation and Sport move into position with her advisers as soon as possible.

Mr SPEIRS: This is on Part B of the agency reports, pages 79 to 81, and all my questions will come from those pages. This refers to the National Disability Insurance Scheme implementation. The following extract is from page 79:

NDIS related expenditure was forecast to total $51 million for the year ending 30 June 2017 and will rise significantly in 2018-19 to $723 million. Actual NDIS and service reform program related expenditure for the year ended 30 June 2017 was $70 million, which included employee benefit expenses of DCSI employees.

Minister, what is the reason for the increase in predicted NDIS-related expenditure in 2016-17, from $51 million to $70 million?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Thank you very much to the member for Bright for his question. As he said, the Auditor-General's Report, Part B, correctly states that NDIS contributions were, indeed, forecast to total $51 million for the year ended 30 June 2017 and were predicted to rise significantly in 2018-19, to $723 million, as a result of our transition to the NDIS and as per bilateral agreements. The Auditor-General's Report, Part A, also states that forecast NDIS expenditure for the year was $121 million and that actual NDIS program expenditure for the year ended 30 June 2017 was $70 million, which included employee benefit expenses for DCSI employees.

The figures quoted in Part A do not solely relate to NDIS expenditure. In addition to staffing expenses, the amounts quoted in the report also include payments in relation to the national aged-care reforms and, as such, those numbers are not comparable with the bilateral estimate of $51 million.

Mr SPEIRS: Minister, in relation to the additional $19 million, is that all connected to aged care?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: It does not all relate to aged care. In relation to aged care and disability services reform, payments to the commonwealth of $59.4 million consist of $23.2 million budget neutrality payments allocated to NDIS service reform and $36.2 million of payments related to cross-billing allocated to the Disability SA program.

Mr SPEIRS: Also on the NDIS, the bilaterals between South Australia and the commonwealth contain a range of data for the scheme. NDIS quarterly reports attract the actual numbers. The bilateral agreement predicted that, at 30 June 2017, 12,887 South Australians would be part of the NDIS. The NDIS quarterly report shows that in South Australia the actual number in the scheme at 30 June was 12,116. My question is: is the minister concerned that the NDIS timetable was too ambitious and rushed people into the scheme?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: It is a really exciting time to be the Minister for Disabilities as we transition to the NDIS. As the member would know, the NDIS is the biggest social reform in Australia since Medicare and I think we can all be very proud here in South Australia that South Australia was the first state to sign up to the NDIS. As I said, that is something we can all be proud of. Our youngest South Australians began transitioning to the NDIS over the past few years: 15 to 17 year olds from 1 January this year, and 18 to 64 year olds from 1 July this year.

We know that there is a lot changing in terms of this transition to the NDIS. It is a time of immense opportunity to ensure that people with disability finally have choice and control about the sorts of services and supports they need. Fundamentally, this reform is absolutely about empowering people with disability but, as I said, we know that there is a lot that is changing, and with a reform of this size of course come challenges. The NDIS is, as you know, a federal entity, and I am certainly doing all that I can to call on the federal government to work with us to make sure that there is a smooth transition and that, through that transition, no South Australian falls through the cracks.

Through the implementation of the NDIS, we are doubling funding to the disability sector. Total funding to our disability sector will equate to $1.5 billion every year at full rollout. Of this, our South Australian government has really very proudly committed $723 million every year. As well as doubling funding, we anticipate that almost double the number of people with disabilities will receive support.

Around 32,000 South Australians will receive support through the NDIS and, really importantly, 9,000 people who have not received services and supports before will do so for the very first time at full implementation. The NDIS is absolutely focused on better care, choice, control and participation in everyday life for people living with a disability, and the NDIS, and certainly our government, is focused on ensuring that every community member through that transition to the NDIS can fully participate in every aspect of community life and also in our economy.

The other really important thing to mention as we transition to the NDIS is that the NDIS will also bring almost double the number of jobs to the disability sector. The disability sector currently has about 6,000 full-time equivalent jobs within it and we think that at full implementation of the NDIS there will be around 12,000 jobs in the disability sector. Work in the disability sector is incredibly rewarding and gives people the opportunity to work very closely with fellow South Australians with disabilities, to empower them to engage in community life.

Certainly, as Minister for Disabilities, I am very much looking forward to and am enjoying working with our many community organisations to make sure that we are ready for these new jobs. Those jobs are being created in personal care, of course, but there are also jobs in allied health, including in occupational therapy, in speech pathology and in physiotherapy. There are also jobs in areas like transport, IT, management and administration.

As just a couple of examples of the new jobs that we are creating through our transition to the NDIS, we have recently seen a not-for-profit community organisation, a wonderful organisation that operates in many communities across South Australia, Cara, announce 40 full-time jobs in Adelaide and across the regions. Recently, when I was in Whyalla, Community Support Incorporated announced with me alongside them that they would be creating 25 new jobs in that region. Minda is about to announce 100 new jobs in Mount Gambier.

Our government is really focused on making sure that we transition people well to the NDIS so that those 9,000 new people who will receive services and supports for the very first time have the choice and control about those supports that we want them to. That is fundamentally at the core of the NDIS. We are very focused on making sure that those jobs come to fruition as well.

As I said, in relation to your question, our investment of $723 million put together with the commonwealth's investment takes us to a $1.5 billion investment in disability, which equates to around double the funding in the sector. I give you all those figures just to make the point that our transition to the NDIS is an absolutely huge exercise, but an exercise that is absolutely the right one for us to engage in. Of course, change of that scale does come with its challenges, but we are very much committed to working through those challenges, to calling on the federal government to work with us to meet those challenges and also to calling on the NDIA to work with us to make sure that transition happens well.

Mr DULUK: Minister, in your statement you just said that the new NDIS project will create about 6,000 new jobs. What modelling and benchmarking has your department undertaken to give veracity to that figure?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Those figures were first produced through the NDIA's market vision statement, which they produced for each state and territory in Australia. Also, we engaged KPMG to produce a report which took a much deeper dive into the South Australian context. The other thing we are doing that I have had the pleasure of being involved in—

Mr Duluk interjecting:

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: To table the KPMG report? I will just get some advice on that. I will just check where that is up to in terms of the tabling. I will take that question on notice and get back to you on that point. The other thing I want to mention in talking about those job numbers, which is a wonderful thing to be able to talk about, is that we are holding 23 expos in communities right across every corner of South Australia. I have had the pleasure of attending some of those expos and will be attending more of them.

The expos have provided a really wonderful opportunity for people with disabilities to come and meet providers and to hear from the department and a number of speakers about the transition to the NDIS, either for themselves or for their loved ones. It has been a great way—and I have seen it for myself—for them to find the information they need, to have any questions answered, and to connect with service providers.

The expos have also provided an excellent opportunity for people who are either looking for a career change or seeking work to find out about those estimated 6,000 jobs in the disability sector. When I visited those expos, it was wonderful to see people getting the information about those jobs. As I said before, I think these jobs are incredibly rewarding, working with people with disabilities and empowering them.

The other great thing that has come from those expos is that the many service providers who have attended have had the opportunity to connect with one another and to talk about their readiness for those new jobs and their readiness around the transition to the NDIS. I wanted to add that information in relation to your question. They have been wonderful. It was great to see the member for Flinders at the Ceduna expo last week. I encourage anybody who is wanting to know more, either members of parliament or their constituents who might be interested in finding out about the jobs to come along to one of the expos. I would certainly be happy to provide information about where the remainder of those 23 expos will be held.

We also have six disability workforce hubs across South Australia, which are great places for people to find information. As people are approaching us in those hubs and through the expos, we are also finding out more about the sort of information they need to make their decisions, whether that be about employment or the services and support they need for themselves or their loved ones.

Mr SPEIRS: Looking back to the intake numbers for the NDIS, on the same reference as my earlier questions, a recent report by the Productivity Commission stated that the NDIS's 'focus on participant intake has compromised the quality of plans and participant outcomes'. Does the minister agree with this statement?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: As I said in an earlier answer, the NDIS is significant reform. In fact, it is the largest social reform here in Australia since the introduction of Medicare. Because of the volume of people we want to see transition well to the NDIS, because of the new jobs that are being created and because of doubling the amount of funding, it does come with enormous challenges and opportunities. I am not happy with any delays, but I am very happy that around 13,000 South Australians have transitioned to the NDIS. We are certainly well down the path compared with some other states, as we should be, given, as I said before, we were proudly the first state to sign up to the NDIS.

I will be raising these kinds of issues when I attend the Disability Reform Council next week. They are also issues that I have raised with the federal minister and directly with the NDIA. Any issue that comes across my desk, in terms of any delays or particular problems that people encounter as they transition, obviously we take very seriously and we are working very closely with South Australians with disabilities, their families, their carers and the organisations that support them to make sure that they get the support they need to transition well. I certainly will be continuing to advocate for the federal government to work with us to make sure that South Australians transition well and that we continue to positively move people to the NDIS.

Mr SPEIRS: Moving to page 80 of the report, under the audit recommendations to DCSI and the fourth dot point, which looks at addressing NDIS work program slippages, it is my understanding that existing Disability SA clients have priority in terms of entering the NDIS, as agreed through the bilateral process, because they already have established their eligibility for disability support.

Disability SA provides a transition summary to the NDIS outlining their existing supports, which should help the NDIS with its own assessment of the individual. It is my understanding that there have been cases where some individuals who were Disability SA clients, including one who is dependent on a wheelchair for mobility, have been rejected by the NDIS. Is the minister or her department aware of this situation?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Thank you to the member for that question and certainly for bringing that particular issue to my attention. It is a really important issue, and I would appreciate receiving details about that person so that I can work with my office and the department to follow up once we receive those particulars about that individual.

Mr SPEIRS: Thank you, minister, and I will ensure that those specifics are passed on to you and your office. As a related question, are you or your department aware of how many Disability SA clients have been unable to transition to NDIS?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: What I can give you are some statistics about the number of decisions that have been made by the NDIA in relation to South Australians and how many in total have been determined as eligible. To give you information about the number of Disability SA clients as opposed to people generally, I will have to bring back more information about that particular element. The total number of access decisions made by the NDIA in South Australia is 15,764, decisions determined as eligible is 14,848, decisions deemed ineligible are 916 and decisions deemed inactive by virtue of the application being withdrawn by the person, closed or revoked is 471. The statistic as at 30 June 2017 in terms of the number of eligible participants with approved plans is 11,634.

That was as at 30June, but I can say—and I said it in an earlier answer—that we estimate that around 13,000 South Australians have now transitioned to the NDIS. We anticipate that, at full scheme transition, around 32,000 South Australians with disability will be able to access services and supports that come with much greater choice and control through the NDIS. As I also said in a previous answer, really pleasingly 9,000 South Australians, through their transition to the NDIS or through the implementation of the NDIS, will receive services and support for the very first time, which is a really pleasing aspect of the implementation of the NDIS.

Mr SPEIRS: If there was a client of Disability SA who for some reason or another found themselves rejected from transitioning to the NDIS, is there a process of appeal that Disability SA will support them through?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Thank you for that really important question. There are a few elements in terms of people's access to a review of decisions. Firstly, there is a review process through the NDIA. Of course, people can also go to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The commonwealth has also provided some funding to the Brain Injury Network to support people with reviews of particular decisions. As always, my department would, is and has been available to people if they require support to have questions answered, to get further information, to find information about the sorts of review processes that are available but also in terms of any other information that they need about the services and supports that will be available to them through the NDIS.

Mr DULUK: Minister, relating to one of your previous answers about providers, what systems do you have in place to make sure that providers are not price gouging or charging the NDIS or clients an inflated price? It has been raised with me a few times that receivers of services are seeing an increased price compared to previous times.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Thank you to the member for that question; I think that is a really important question. At this point in time, the NDIA is setting fixed prices for particular services. It is my understanding that when there is a much more mature market the NDIA will deregulate but is not doing that now because they are also worried about the issue of price gouging, inappropriate pricing around particular services. So right now the NDIA is setting prices for particular services.

Mr DULUK: That has not come into force yet.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: Yes.

The CHAIR: I thank the members for Bright and Davenport for their questions and the minister and her advisers for attending. We now move to the Minister for Police and all the other things that he has attached to him and ask him to move into position with his advisers. The member for Schubert, I believe, is taking the helm for this. Member for Schubert, you are in charge. What page will you be looking at?

Mr KNOLL: We will look at corrections first, dealing with Part B, page 90. Minister, what was the total budget over spend for 2016-17?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I am able to advise that the figure was $0.068 million, which I think is $68,000. In the scheme of the quite significant DCS budget and its variable intake in terms of who it has to deal with, that is quite a small figure.

Mr KNOLL: How much was the actual spend on police cells for 2016-17?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I understand that the total spent on police cells across the City Watch House, Sturt and Holden Hill was in the order of $4.9 million.

Mr KNOLL: Can the minister outline what the budget is for police cells for the 2017-18 year?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I understand that is something that is managed within the department's resources and is not a specific budget line, nor do I believe it is necessarily referred to in the Auditor-General's Report that we are asking questions on. Certainly, with the additional capacity that he and I saw yesterday at Port Augusta with the Saltbush unit opening with 128 extra beds, that will significantly reduce the demand on the department needing to use police cells in the way they have done in previous years.

Mr KNOLL: What happened up until the middle of 2015 is that essentially police cells were unbudgeted and that any police cell expenditure came as an overrun for which DCS had to go back to Treasury for an extra allocation. It was decided, at least for the 2016-17 financial year but potentially the year previous, that there was going to be an allocated budget. Is there an allocated budget for police cells in 2017-18 or is the approved budget zero?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: As I just explained, this is not something where there is an allocated budget in 2017-18. If there are police cells that need to be used in this financial year, that is something the department will have to either wear within its own budget or make a request. However, as I explained, we do have the benefit this financial year of a very significant increase in terms of capacity through the new Port Augusta facility and we have not seen—that is not to say that there has been zero—the demand in terms of police cells that we have had in previous years. Also, Chair, I am not quite sure where we are in terms of what reference this is in the Auditor-General's Report.

Mr KNOLL: DCS spends money on police cells; it is in expenses and there will be a few more specific questions on that afterwards. I refer to Part B, page 93, in relation to expenses. The graph there shows that in 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 growth in prisoner numbers roughly equated—at least looking at this graph—to the increase in expenses. Why is it that in the 2017 year the increase in expenses outstripped the increased number of prisoners?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Could I clarify what graph the member for Schubert is referring to?

Mr KNOLL: I refer to page 93, expenses. It says here that there is a 44 per cent increase in expenses by $98 million, yet there was only a 35 per cent increase in prisoner numbers to 790. This is over the five-year period. Essentially, the report outlines the fact that, even though there has been a consistent corollary between prisoner numbers and expenses—it has roughly been about $100,000 per year—this year that has changed.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I might have to get some more exact information because it is a bit hard to provide too much detail in terms of the analysis of this graph. Essentially, as I understand it, there is additional spending that the department is now undertaking as part of our 10 by 20 project, which I think is quite positive. I know the member for Schubert is supportive of lots of the elements as well.

Those elements where we might be spending money would not necessarily align with our previous line, where the only thing that the department is doing is spending money in terms of how many prisoners you have, therefore you might see a more direct relationship in terms of how many prisoners there are to exactly what the budget is. There are obviously a number of factors that go into that. I would not want to suggest that that is the only factor that goes into it.

Obviously, as the increase in budget has gone up, a part of that is to do with the increasing number of prisoners we have in the system. It has been widely noted that that has increased significantly over the past decade, but there are also follow-throughs in our previous enterprise bargaining agreements that lead to increased costs as well and there are also different programs that the department might undertake. I understand that some of them involve things like home detention and also the alternatives to custody project. I would be happy to discuss them further in more detail, but there are obviously a number of factors that go into the department's budget, not just prisoner numbers.

Mr KNOLL: Would the minister accept that, given the 10 by 20 strategy was only outlined in the 2017-18 budget, it was impossible for all but the consulting spend to actually be in the 2016-17 financial year?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: That is right. A very small amount would have been in that financial year. What I am outlining is that there are a lot of other things, in terms of what the department has been spending money on, in terms of programs. I understand there are new criminogenic programs, which have resulted in 19 staff working on that. There is also home detention implementation and the alternatives to custody project, as well as the addition, in terms of our accommodation, in staff across those sites that are expanding, such as Port Augusta, that we saw yesterday, as well as our enterprise bargaining obligations that we need to meet in terms of REB pay rises to staff as well.

There is obviously a broad range of things the department does. I am happy to get more information in terms of exactly what those increases have been in the 2017 year and in terms of that graph point. In terms of 10 by 20, I am pointing to the fact that, over coming years, we are going to see less of a relationship directly to prisoner numbers because we are doing other things that are hopefully going to lead to reduced numbers of people reoffending and coming back into our system, which I think is a good thing to do.

Mr KNOLL: I refer to Part A, page 32. It says here that prisoner numbers, as at 30 June 2017, increased by 96 people, or 3 per cent, to 3,050. That was the number as at that date. It talks about improved beds being taken on, but in the budget, which was released on 22 or 23 June, the department actually says that the average prison population is going to be 3,001. I assume if we are saying 30 June is 3,050 that 1 July can be the same. Given that we are starting basically 50 people above where the department thinks the average prison population is going to be for the 2017-18 year—I apologise, it is worse; 2,989 is the projection for 2017-18—does the minister stand by the budget and the estimates that are provided in the 2017-18 budget?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: As I understand it, the member is comparing two different things: one is a point in time number of how many prisoners were in the system as at 30 June, and the other figure is an average over a period of 12 months. It is hard to compare an average over 12 months to one point in time. I think that what is assumed in his question is that the numbers always go up in a linear line whereas, as I understand it—and I was advised when I came into this portfolio—there are seasonal changes that happen from time to time in our prisoner numbers, and that is why the budget figures that are produced go to an average figure across the whole year rather than one particular day.

Mr KNOLL: Sure, except that in the last sitting week the minister gave us an answer that the current average prison population is around 3,050. That was a question I asked and I am just getting the exact details of it. However, we have seen, at least over the past five years, an increase in prison population between 3 per cent and 7 per cent every year, and that 3 per cent is a long-term trend over the last 10 or 15 years. Is the minister suggesting that this will be the first year in the last couple of decades where we are actually going to see a population decrease?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: With respect, that is not quite what I was saying. We have projections in terms of our increase in prisoner numbers, and that is something that the department does on the best advice of trends that are happening within the criminal justice system, what is happening in our legal system, what laws we pass and things like that as well. We are certainly seeing a long-term trend in terms of increasing numbers. What I was pointing out was that you cannot necessarily compare one particular day with what the average over a year is going to be. Just because one particular day was at a higher figure than what you might expect over the year does not necessarily mean that the average projection is going to be false.

These are obviously the best endeavours of the department to come up with these estimates and there is a lot of work behind that. There are a lot of variables in terms of what the inevitable result might be. However, that figure represented in the budget is certainly the best projection that we have. Those projections obviously include a lot of the programs that the department has underway in terms of things like home detention and basing them into those projections as well to come up with those figures.

Mr KNOLL: Minister, in relation to 10 by 20, which you referenced before, when do you believe that contracts will be signed for both the New Foundations program and for the Work Ready, Release Ready, which I think GCS is undertaking the majority of the work for? When will both of those programs begin?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: We are certainly expecting the contracts to be signed very soon. Exactly how soon obviously depends upon the remaining elements of the procurement process. I will certainly be excited to tell the member for Schubert the outcome of that procurement as soon as it is available.

Mr KNOLL: Minister, are you expecting that to be done by the end of the year, or by the middle of next year? Is it months or is it 12 months away?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I think it is fair to say that it is within the next few months that we hope to have that procurement finished and be able to let you know the good news.

Mr KNOLL: I move on to Volume 1, page 476, expenses. In relation to accommodation and lease costs, there has been a 10 per cent increase, from $8.1 million to $9.4 million, and also in the second part of that, from $3.5 million to $3.6 million. Can the minister outline what the cause of the increased cost from the 2016 to the 2017 year was?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I see the figure that the member for Schubert is referring to, which does have an increase in terms of the accommodation and associated lease costs. I would have to double-check what exactly has gone into those figures. I understand that it does include our office accommodation, but exactly what has led to that increase I will take on notice and get back to the member as soon as possible.

Mr KNOLL: Minister, I just got an update. Your answer on 11 November was that 3,080 prisoners was the daily average prison population. Do you still stand by your comments, minister, that, from the average that has existed over the past three months, we are going to see a 3 per cent decrease? Well, actually it would have to be double that to get to an average of three, but essentially we are going to see 160 fewer prisoners in the system by the middle of next year?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: Once again, I will just have to try to explain the figures here. The 3,080 is about that particular day. Every day we know how many prisoners are in our system, and that day it was 3,080. The figure in the budget is an average over the 12 months in terms of the number of prisoners in our system. There might be some days when it is more than that average in the budget, and there might be some days when it is less than that average. The average figure across the 12 months in the budget represents our best efforts at determining what our demand on the system, and hence our demand on resources, is going to be across the year with a number of different factors that have gone into those calculations.

Mr KNOLL: If I can go back to Part A, page 32, minister, are you able to provide a total project cost for the opening of the extension to the Port Augusta Prison?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: From my memory yesterday, when we announced the project as a $57 million project, we only have the figures for what we had spent up until 30 June this year, which was substantially lower than that, at $26.7 million. Exactly how much as at this point in time we have spent, I will have to take on notice to get that answer. I am advised that we are expecting that it is going to be within the budget that was set for the project.

Mr KNOLL: Minister, on the same reference, do you have an opening date yet for the expansion down at Mount Gambier?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I am advised that the opening of the new facilities at Mount Gambier is expected to be in June 2018 but not a particular date at this point in time, but somewhere in June 2018.

Mr KNOLL: Can we move on to SAFECOM.

The CHAIR: What page will you be talking to, member for Schubert?

Mr KNOLL: Part B, page 372. There are quite a number of references in all the emergency services agencies in relation to the Burns review and the separate recommendations that belong to each of those departments. In relation to the CFS, recommendation 26 asked for systems for automatic vehicle location and this was not accepted. Essentially, I assume what this recommends is that there is an AVL upgrade across the CFS fleet; it could be SES, I assume, as well. Can I ask why this recommendation was not accepted?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: As the member outlined, there was a recommendation in the Burns review about automatic vehicle location for appliances, such as CFS trucks, and this was one of the recommendations that was not proceeded with. Essentially, as I understand it, that was a decision across the government. This is a whole-of-government report at that time based on the cost benefit of implementing that. However, I am advised that the CFS are working with Western Australia on a pilot of a number of vehicles testing this, so this might be something that we look at in the future as more funding becomes available as to whether we invest in this sort of technology on the basis of the work we are undertaking at the moment, looking at how it could be rolled out most effectively.

Mr KNOLL: In the same report, it talks about an options paper. Do you have any time line on when the options paper is going to be completed and put out for consultation?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: For AVL?

Mr KNOLL: Yes.

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I am not sure in terms of the exact timing on the paper that the member refers to, but I am happy to take that on notice and get back to him.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: Madam Chair, I am just mindful of the time and the programming issue that confronts us. I am just wondering whether the member for Schubert might wish to take advantage of the next couple of minutes to read in anything that he has so that when something happens in about two minutes he will not be in any way compromised.

Mr KNOLL: This is the last question I have and, if this is the last question, potentially SAPOL or SAFECOM can answer. As part of the Burns review, recommendation 34 talked about a designated control agency for black system events and major power outages. It is a recommendation that has been handballed to SAPOL, but I am wondering if that decision has been made?

The Hon. C.J. PICTON: I am happy to advise the member that SAPOL has accepted the role, and has been designated as the control agency for black system events, as part of our response to the Burns report. A hazard plan is being completed and then a formal designation of that change will occur. This will allow the control agency (SAPOL) to undertake any further planning required that arises from the actions identified in the risk assessment and hazard planning processes.

The CHAIR: The time having expired, we thank the member for Schubert for his questions and the minister and his advisors for attending. The committee has examined ministers on matters contained in the Auditor-General's Report referred to it and has completed is examination.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT