Smithson: Is Opposition’s attack over Bedford rescue a wise move?
As the Bedford Group rescue plan rolls on, InDaily columnist Mike Smithson reveals a behind-the-scenes FOI document attack that has the Premier ready to strike back.
Saving Bedford from looming liquidation should be a celebration for every South Australian.
It means 1,250 supported workers and clients with a disability keep their jobs and stay close to their friends who’ve become part of their lives for decades, in many cases.
It was hard not share in the joy of hundreds of people who’d seen their lives turn upside down, but now that fear has subsided.
So, was it appropriate for the Opposition to attempt to torpedo the day’s good news with the release of Freedom of Information documents?
Just before the Premier grabbed the microphone at Bedford’s Panorama facility, the Libs were busy briefing the media, well me at least, on what they saw as a clear demonstration of “dragging the chain” on the funding rescue package.
Their later media release said FOI documents showed emergency discussions between the State Government and Bedford began in late May.
According to them, a formal request for cash was lodged on June 30 and approved on July 10 by Acting Treasurer Andrea Michaels.
Bedford went public with its problem on July 24, and the rescue package was finally unveiled on July 27 by the Premier
So, what are the Libs questioning here, and who are they accusing?
They initially questioned whether panic-stricken Bedford employees were unnecessarily kept in the dark for 17 days after the cash handout was officially signed off.
When I asked if they were alluding to the Premier allegedly sitting on an announcement for more than a fortnight allowing him to reveal it after returning from holidays, they suggested I put that to him.
You might like
So, I did, and his response was interesting.
“I’m not going to take the state Liberal Party’s analysis on this as gospel, but there has been a very substantial process gone through quite methodically,” he said.
On the specific issue of him stalling the announcement to suit his agenda the Premier was more forthright.
“No that’s just not true, just plainly untrue.
“And I would like to see them make those statements on camera, let me know and I will get that footage and deal with it accordingly,” he threatened.
By yesterday afternoon Shadow Human Services Minister Michelle Lensink was treading more cautiously.
“It’s a delay as far as Bedford, the organisation, and the clients and the residents are concerned,” she said.
“I don’t think we should be making excuses for different levels of government who won’t resolve these issues for the best interests of the families.”
But Ms Lensink, it’s been resolved, so what’s the big deal?
“Yeah ok, I’m not going to cut them any excuses, others may be prepared to do so, but people expect governments to resolve these issues,” she said.
“I don’t think we should be cutting any slack, especially when this deal isn’t in the best interest of Bedford in any case.”
Here she’s referring to the future of supported accommodation Balyana which is now controlled by the state government with a view to an eventual sale.
Stay tuned.
So, what’s behind the Premier’s threat to “deal” with Opposition innuendo?
The Premier explains the 17-day timeframe between signing off on the initial cash proposal and announcing the eventual rescue package as two separate issues.
Bedford had first sounded alarm bells and needed cash to get it over a clear and present financial danger.
Stay informed, daily
But that initial smaller sum was never going to cut it, and the state government knew it.
It sought a dollar-for-dollar matching subsidy from the feds who weren’t prepared to jump in with any quick fix, fearing it could be money down the drain.
So, the Michaels-approved state-funded cheque was never handed over to Bedford.
It was back to square one and a larger state package of $15 million was thrashed out over the next fortnight and then revealed by the Premier on July 27.
It seems hard to find fault with that process or timeline.
Balyana is another issue entirely.
Its accommodation sits on prime land with sea views at Clapham housing 40 residents.
The government originally secured ownership over the land as an insurance policy against the $15 million it had stumped up.
“The government needs to rule out redevelopment,” Ms Lensink demanded.
“Residents at Balyana and their families have been disrupted in this process and will be forced to leave all the people they know and feel safe with, to fend for themselves,” she said.
The government currently leases Balyana back to Bedford for a peppercorn rent.
Fear spreads quickly when rumours abound of a rug about to be pulled from those with special needs.
But the government denies it has any plans to cash in at Balyana until a smooth and compassionate transition has been completed.
It says Bedford originally had Balyana in its sights for a sale, but that was stopped when administrators were appointed.
The Premier praised his Human Services Minister Nat Cook for actively calming the brewing issue.
All families have been advised via email that no one will be forced out, and relocations will be completed over a lengthy timeframe.
I question the wisdom of the Opposition relying on heavily redacted FOI documents to launch an attack on such a sensitive topic.
After Michelle Lensink’s media conference, I reiterated my thoughts to her that both governments had acted appropriately and I couldn’t see the point of kite-flying questions to discredit the Premier.
I’m certainly not a self-proclaimed cheer leader for Peter Malinauskas, or any other politician, but I see a process which has been strictly followed, without initial cooperation from the federal government, and one that could have toppled over on numerous occasions.
Total contribution from state taxpayers is $21 million and $17.6 million from the feds.
Had Bedford been liquidated, the human and emotional costs would have been far greater.
Mike Smithson is weekend presenter and political analyst for 7NEWS.
