Senate Community Affairs References Committee - Adelaide, SA [Part 2]
24 August 2026
Speaker dots
- Speakers in the chapter
- Colour: political group
- Grey: no group
Tap or click a chapter's dots to see names and groups.
Contents updated on 24 Aug 2026
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Senate Community Affairs References Committee Australian Parliament
00:00 - 02:41
Speaker 1
The scores go from 0 to 48. The higher the score, the lower the need. Once you've got into a branch of the tree, there's no coming back. You can't skip into another branch, and so that is the most critical decision in the whole algorithm. Each branch of the tree is then split on needs, and after I've given an overview, I'm going to take you through each split in the tree.
And then the needs are each split into compounding factors, and then the last level creates the seven, the eight funding levels of support at home and a class for CHSP. The reason I know how to can explain this to you is that it's actually in the rules, but it's in the rules in such a convoluted way that unless you're used to looking at this sort of material, you can't really see it. But rule 81.10, for example, I've just done a screenshot of for support at home class one, how you get into the rules. How you get into each class, and the rules are very convoluted. Sometimes the algorithm is in rules, sometimes it's in the glossary of terms.
It's not all together in the rules, which makes it very impossible for people to keep up. I want to go back to that point of what's happening here, and if you look at the two red block boxes I've created, I've got two scores of function, two scores of need. They're different branches of the tree, but at the last second, the algorithm does a double twist with pike, and it goes from being classes to funding levels, putting together groups who until this point have been completely different. And that is really technically ridiculous thing to do. It's not really an algorithm when you get to the end of the algorithm, don't like what you've got, and then you change it.
But I'll now walk you through each slide. I just want to point out something about the first level function. No algorithm should start with a functional subscore or any subscore because you create this problem. And the problem is illustrated in the bottom two boxes, a functional score of 0 to 24, then another one 25 to 29. So one point difference puts you in two different branches of the tree.
The rest of the transcript is for Pro customers
Unlock the full transcript, chat, and every analysis feature with Polyfact Pro.
The video itself stays free to watch, in full, no account needed.
Start a free trial