Page 3563 - Week 11 - Thursday, 24 September 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Office for Women—staff
(Question No 480)
Mrs Jones asked the Minister for Women, upon notice, on 6 August 2015:
(1) How many Full Time Equivalent (FTE) staff have worked in the Office for Women each year for the last five years.
(2) What has been the staffing cost for each year (a) over the past 5 years and (b) in the forward estimates.
Ms Berry: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:
(1) As detailed in Attachment A, the Community Participation Group operates as one combined team. In 2015-16 there is a total budgeted FTE of 44 staff covered by the Output Class and this number is budgeted for in the forward estimates.
(2)
a) The table in Attachment A shows an indicative allocation for the Office for Women that is a notional total of the amounts covered under their program area within the broader Community Participation Group. It includes predominantly salaries and wages, some grants and a small amount of administration expenditure.
b) Changes in staffing levels will reflect, in part the changes in content and function of the Group with an example of this change provided in Attachment A regarding community facilities and the impact on the Group budget.
Attachment A
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION: OUTPUT CLASS 3
The Community Participation Group brings together a number of functions under one umbrella. The Group includes the functions Community Recovery, Youth Engagement, Office for Ageing, Office for Women and the Office for Multicultural Affairs. Within the same Output 3.1 is the Office for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, the Community Development Grant Scheme and previously Community Facilities.
The Community Participation Group has changed over the last few years based on organisational needs, but has also aligned with a general theme of optimising community participation and community engagement. As outlined during the Estimates Hearings the resources are largely pooled and this is found to be an effective use of resources given that the policy work and engagement activities can be episodic.
For this reason the figures provided for the Community Participation subunits are notional because staff in each area of the Community Participation Group work across other program areas on an as needs basis. Therefore these numbers are difficult to compare across the years.
For example the most significant movement in resourcing over the last few years has been the transfer of community facilities properties to CMTEDD and the movement of the community recovery function into the Community Participation Output Class. Greater detail regarding activities of this Output Class is provided in the CSD Annual Report.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video