HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2021-03-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Homelessness Prevention Funding

The Hon. J.E. HANSON (15:15): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a question of the Minister for Human Services regarding housing.

Leave granted.

The Hon. J.E. HANSON: On radio this morning, the minister could not explain why her agency was unable to provide an extra $50 or $100 per week to a homeless family so they could afford a home, but they could spend $1,350 per week for hotel accommodation. When answering a question in this place on 4 March about why the minister only spent $4.4 million of the promised $20 million for homelessness the minister said, and I quote:

There could have been one option taken which could have been to do what they do with the NDIS, which is to provide the funds to the client. They might determine that they wanted to spend that significant funding which goes into the system themselves on services that would assist them, but we have worked together through the alliance process.

My questions to the minister are: does the minister trust families enough to decide for themselves how to spend even a tiny amount of additional funding; and, if so, why couldn't this approach be trialled as an innovative new approach for targeted and select groups, such as single mums with four children who are costing the government thousands of dollars to live in unsuitable hotel accommodation?

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (Minister for Human Services) (15:17): I thank the honourable member for his question, which gives me an opportunity to outline the many and varied programs that operate through the public system, the non-government sector, to assist people who are challenged in maintaining private rental or find themselves in a homelessness situation. I think the honourable member in his question has conflated a few of the different services—done a bit of a mashup—so I think it's worth outlining to the chamber the different parts of the spectrum, why they are there and how much we are expending on each of them.

To one of his points: he talked about the important reforms through the proposed alliance structure, for which the tenders have now closed and which I note the Australian Labor Party has at times been critical of in this chamber. The alliance process was something that the services themselves have sought. We spend some $70 million on homelessness services, including the specialist domestic violence sector, every year in South Australia.

We have some 20,000 clients in that process, which equates to approximately $3,500 per client per annum. That's where the comments are lifted in terms of my previous statements regarding the NDIS, which is funded on activities that—participants (as they are known in that system) are provided with a package of services which they choose which provider they wish to utilise through that system.

In terms of the homelessness reforms, we've got an existing structure which is quite extensive throughout South Australia. There's a large number of service providers which provide a range of services, whether it's meal services, case management, a range of support services. I note that a number of members, along with the Governor, the Premier and myself, attended the reopening of the Hutt St Centre, which is well known to many South Australians. They also provide some health services, including a royal district nurse, so those services already exist.

What I have been trying to explain to members of the Labor Party is that, rather than provide that funding directly to the clients, we have a range of services. I would be interested to know what the non-government service providers, which are the existing providers, think about the Labor Party suggesting that, instead of providing specialist services, they indeed get a cash grant.

The discussion on the radio this morning related to the emergency assistance program, which is, generally speaking, a short-term measure that is provided. One-third of those clients are actually domestic and family violence victims, so they usually access those programs via the specialist Women's Safety Services and the like. I think it's understandable that, if there is a situation where a family needs to flee from a violent situation, they would need to access emergency accommodation.

I might add, too, that the emergency accommodation program has operated for many, many years. It operated under Labor. It's not a cheap program; it costs us several million dollars a year. We have recognised that hotel accommodation is far from ideal and I think I have made those comments in this place many times, which is why, in that specialist DV space, we have increased crisis beds by 31 for families fleeing and nine for perpetrators.

If we look to the other cohorts who utilise the emergency accommodation system, generally they are short term. They need some sort of support between rentals, so those are generally approved on a short-term basis for those families. I think what I was at pains to try to explain this morning was that there already exists subsidies for people who are in private rental accommodation, particularly for people who are Centrelink recipients. Anybody who is in a public housing property or in the emergency system doesn't have access to that subsidy from the commonwealth government. What has been suggested is that we should, on top of that, be paying another subsidy in the private rental system.

We have always been aware that there are bottlenecks in our system and that is why the homelessness reforms are so important to improve the flow of people through that system. We are looking when they come online so that there will be a housing first option for people in the DV situation—we refer to it as a safety first situation—so that people can be housed and have those wraparound supports.

The alliances themselves will be provided with the funding to determine themselves how they expend that money. They may well look at brokerage programs. I'm aware that Anglicare also has a particular headlease arrangement as one of their suite of options. Going forward, we believe that the services that are provided to people who are currently in hotels/motels will be much more household-centred and be much more appropriate to people's needs.

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