SOUTH AUSTRALIA]

No. 66

 

 

MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS

 

OF THE

 

 

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

_______

 

 

 

THURSDAY  7  JULY  2005

 

 

 

   1.

Council met pursuant to adjournment.  The President (The Hon. R. R. Roberts) took the Chair.

                 The President read prayers.

 

Meeting of
Council.

 

   2.

The Minister for Industry and Trade (The Hon. P. Holloway), without notice, moved - That the Standing Orders be so far suspended as to enable Petitions, the Tabling of Papers and Question Time to be taken into consideration at fifteen minutes past two o’clock.

                 Question put and passed, without a dissentient voice, there being present an absolute majority of the whole number of Members of the Council.

 

Suspension
of Standing
Orders.

 

   3.

The Minister for Industry and Trade, by leave, without notice, moved - That the sitting of the Council be not suspended during the continuation of the Conference on the Statutes Amendment (Aggravated Offences) Bill.

                 Question put and passed.

 

Statutes Amendment
(Aggravated Offences) Bill.

 

   4.

The Minister for Industry and Trade, by leave, without notice, moved - That the sitting of the Council be not suspended during the continuation of the Conference on the Correctional Services (Parole) Amendment Bill.

                 Question put and passed.

 

Correctional Services
(Parole)
Amendment Bill.

 

   5.

Ordered - That Orders of the Day (Government Business) No. 1 to No. 4 be postponed and taken into consideration after Order of the Day (Government Business) No. 5.

 

Postponement
of Business.

 

   6.

 

The Council, according to order, resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole for the further consideration of the Special Commission of Inquiry (Powers and Immunities) Bill.

 

In the Committee

 

                                   Clauses No. 1 and No. 2 agreed to.

                                   Clause No. 3 read.

                          The Hon. R. D. Lawson moved on page 2, lines 13 and 14, to leave out all words in these lines and insert “reference as set out in Schedule 1”.

                          The Hon. S. M. Kanck moved on page 2, lines 13 and 14, to leave out all words in these lines and insert “reference as set out in Schedule 1”.

                          Question - That the amendment moved by the Hon. R. D. Lawson be agreed to - put.

Special Commission
of Inquiry
(Powers and
Immunities) Bill.

 

 

             Committee divided:

Ayes, 13

The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins

The Hon. A. L. Evans

The Hon. I. Gilfillan

The Hon. S. M. Kanck

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink

The Hon. R. I. Lucas

The Hon. A. J. Redford

The Hon. K. J. Reynolds

The Hon. D. W. Ridgway

The Hon. C. V. Schaefer

The Hon. J. F. Stefani

The Hon. N. Xenophon

The Hon. R. D. Lawson (Teller)

      So it was resolved in the affirmative.

 

Noes, 5

The Hon. G. E. Gago

The Hon. J. M. Gazzola

The Hon. R. K. Sneath

The Hon. C. Zollo

The Hon. P. Holloway (Teller)

 

 

 

                                   Clause No. 3, as amended, agreed to.

                                   Clause No. 4 read.

                          The Hon. R. D. Lawson moved on page 2, line 24, to leave out paragraph (a) and insert:

                                   “(a)  section 18(3)(c) and (6); and”.

                          Question - That the amendment be agreed to - put.

 

 

 

             Committee divided:

Ayes, 13

The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins

The Hon. A. L. Evans

The Hon. I. Gilfillan

The Hon. S. M. Kanck

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink

The Hon. R. I. Lucas

The Hon. A. J. Redford

The Hon. K. J. Reynolds

The Hon. D. W. Ridgway

The Hon. C. V. Schaefer

The Hon. J. F. Stefani

The Hon. N. Xenophon

The Hon. R. D. Lawson (Teller)

      So it was resolved in the affirmative.

 

Noes, 5

The Hon. G. E. Gago

The Hon. J. M. Gazzola

The Hon. R. K. Sneath

The Hon. C. Zollo

The Hon. P. Holloway (Teller)

 

 

 

                                   Clause No. 4, as amended, agreed to.

                                   New clause No. 4A inserted.

                                   Clause No. 5 amended and agreed to.

                                   Clause No. 6 agreed to.

                          The Hon. R. D. Lawson moved on page 3, after line 26, to insert new clause as follows:

 “6A—Statements by witness not admissible against witness

A statement or disclosure made by a witness in answer to a question put to the witness, or in evidentiary material produced by the witness, for the purposes of the Inquiry will not (except in proceedings for an offence against this Act or for contempt) be admissible in evidence against the witness in any civil or criminal proceedings in any court.”.

                          Question - That new clause No. 6A, as proposed to be inserted by the Hon. R. D. Lawson, be so inserted - put.

 

 

 

             Committee divided:

Ayes, 13

The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins

The Hon. A. L. Evans

The Hon. I. Gilfillan

The Hon. S. M. Kanck

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink

The Hon. R. I. Lucas

The Hon. A. J. Redford

The Hon. K. J. Reynolds

The Hon. D. W. Ridgway

The Hon. C. V. Schaefer

The Hon. J. F. Stefani

The Hon. N. Xenophon

The Hon. R. D. Lawson (Teller)

      So it was resolved in the affirmative.

 

Noes, 5

The Hon. G. E. Gago

The Hon. J. M. Gazzola

The Hon. R. K. Sneath

The Hon. C. Zollo

The Hon. P. Holloway (Teller)

 

 

 

                                   New clause No. 6A inserted.

                                   Clause No. 7 read.

 

 

 

                          To report progress and ask leave to sit again.

_____________________

 

                 The President resumed the Chair and reported progress and obtained for the Committee leave to sit again on motion.

 

 

 

   7.

At five minutes past one o’clock the sitting was suspended until the ringing of the bells.

                 At fifteen minutes past two o’clock the sitting was resumed.

 

Suspension and
Resumption of
Sitting.

 

   8.

The Clerk announced that the following Petition had been lodged for presentation:

                 By the Hon. N. Xenophon from 945 residents of South Australia concerning poker machines in Coober Pedy.  The Petitioners pray that this Honourable House will call on the Government to introduce legislation to enable all poker machines to be removed from Coober Pedy.

 

Petition:
No. 26 - Poker
Machines in
Coober Pedy.

 

 

   9.

Answers to Questions on Notice Nos. 192, 193 and 221 received this day were tabled by the President who directed that they be distributed and printed in Hansard.

 

Answers to
Questions on
Notice.

 

  10.

The following Papers were laid upon the Table, viz.:

        By the Minister for Industry and Trade (The Hon. P. Holloway) -

                 Adelaide Film Festival - Report 2004.

                 Public Sector Management Act 1995 - Section 69 - Appointments of Ministers’ Personal Staff.

 

Papers.

 

11.

The Minister for Industry and Trade tabled a copy of a Ministerial Statement made by the Premier (The Hon. M. D. Rann, M.P.) concerning Results following New Laws relating to Hoon Drivers.

 

Ministerial
Statement Tabled.

 

12.

The Minister for Industry and Trade tabled a copy of a Ministerial Statement made by the Premier concerning the Next Phase in South Australia’s Defence Push.

 

Ministerial
Statement Tabled.

 

13.

The Minister for Emergency Services (The Hon. C. Zollo) tabled a copy of a Ministerial Statement made by the Minister for Industrial Relations (The Hon. M. J. Wright, M.P.) concerning Public Sector Salary Outcomes.

 

Ministerial
Statement Tabled.

 

14.

Ordered - That Orders of the Day (Government Business) No. 1 to No. 4 and Orders of the Day (Private Business) No. 1 to No. 5 be postponed and taken into consideration after Order of the Day (Private Business) No. 6.

 

Postponement
of Business.

 

15.

The Council, according to order, resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole for the further consideration of the Heritage (Beechwood Garden) Amendment Bill.

 

Heritage
(Beechwood Garden)
Amendment Bill.

 

 

In the Committee

 

                                   Clauses No. 1 to No. 3 agreed to.

                                   Clause No. 4 read.

                          The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink moved on page 3, lines 10 to 18, to leave out all words in these lines and insert the following:

     “(3)      For the purposes of subclause (1), a significant variation of a heritage agreement is a variation—

      (a)    that makes provision with respect to—

     (i)    the division of the prescribed land (being a division of land within the meaning of the Development Act 1993); or

    (ii)    the granting of any lease, licence, easement or other right relating to the use, occupation or control of the prescribed land; or

      (b)    that provides for or permits a significant alteration of the garden constituted within the prescribed land; or

      (c)    that otherwise significantly varies the agreement,

but does not include a variation that only makes provision with respect to a transfer of the prescribed land to a new owner.”.

                          Question - That the amendment be agreed to - put and negatived.

                                   Clause No. 4 agreed to.

                                   Title agreed to.

____________________

 

                 The President resumed the Chair, and reported that the Committee had considered the Bill and had agreed to the same without amendment; whereupon the Council adopted such report.

                 The Minister for Industry and Trade, pursuant to contingent notice, moved - That the Standing Orders be so far suspended as to enable the Bill to pass through its remaining stages without delay.

                 Question put and passed.

                 Bill read a third time.

                 Resolved - That this Bill do now pass.

 

 

 

16.

Ordered - That Orders of the Day (Government Business) No. 1 to No. 4 and Orders of the Day (Private Business) No. 1 to No. 3 be postponed and taken into consideration after Order of the Day (Private Business) No. 4.

 

Postponement
of Business.

 

17.

On the Order of the Day being read for the adjourned debate on the motion of the Minister for Emergency Services - That the Report of the Select Committee on the Status of Fathers in South Australia, be noted:

                 Debate resumed.

                 Question put and passed.

 

Select Committee
on the Status of
Fathers in  South Australia -
Report be noted -
Motion re.

 

18.

Ordered - That Orders of the Day (Government Business) No. 1 to No. 3 be Orders of the Day for next day of sitting.

 

Postponement
of Business.

 

19.

On the Order of the Day read for the adjourned debate on the question - That the Appropriation Bill be now read a second time:

                 Debate resumed.

                 Question put and passed.

                 Bill read a second time.

                 The President then left the Chair, and the Council resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole for the consideration of the Bill.

 

In the Committee

 

                          Clauses No. 1 to No. 8 agreed to.

                          Schedule agreed to.

                          Title agreed to.

_____________________

 

Appropriation Bill.

 

 

 

                 The President resumed the Chair, and reported that the Committee had considered the Bill and had agreed to the same without amendment; whereupon the Council adopted such report.

                 The Minister for Industry and Trade, pursuant to contingent notice, moved - That the Standing Orders be so far suspended as to enable the Bill to pass through its remaining stages without delay.

                 Question put and passed.

                 Bill read a third time.

                 Resolved - That this Bill do now pass.

 

 

 

20.

 

The Council, according to order, resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole for the further consideration of the Special Commission of Inquiry (Powers and Immunities) Bill.

 

In the Committee

 

                                   Clause No. 7 further considered and agreed to.

                          The Hon. R. D. Lawson moved on page 3, after line 36, to insert new schedule as follows:

“Schedule 1—Terms of reference

To inquire into and report upon the following matters:

      (1)       Whether the Premier or any Minister, ministerial adviser or public servant participated in any activity or discussions concerning:

      (a)       the possible appointment of Mr Ralph Clarke to a government board or position; or

      (b)      the means of facilitating recovery by Mr Clarke of costs incurred by him in connection with a defamation action between Mr Clarke and Attorney-General Atkinson.

(The activity and discussions and events surrounding them are referred to in these terms as "the issues".)

      (2)       If so, the content and nature of such activity or discussions.

      (3)       Whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser authorised any such discussions or whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser was aware of the discussions at the time they were occurring or subsequently.

      (4)       Whether the conduct (including acts of commission or omission) of the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser or public servant contravened any law or Code of Conduct; or whether such conduct was improper or failed to comply with appropriate standards of probity and integrity.

      (5)       Whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser made any statement in relation to the issues which was misleading, inaccurate or dishonest in any material particular.

      (6)       Whether the actions taken by the Premier and Ministers in relation to the issues were appropriate and consistent with proper standards of probity and public administration and, in particular:

      (a)       why no public disclosure of the issues was made until June 2003;

      (b)      why the issues were not reported to police in November 2002 and whether that failure was appropriate;

      (c)       why Mr Randall Ashbourne was reprimanded in December 2002 and whether that action was appropriate;

      (d)      whether the appointment of Mr Warren McCann to investigate the issues was appropriate;

      (e)       whether actions taken in response to the report prepared by Mr McCann were appropriate.

      (7)       What processes and investigations the Auditor-General undertook and whether the Auditor-General was furnished with adequate and appropriate material upon which to base the conclusions reflected in his letter dated 20 December 2002 to the Premier.

      (8)       Whether adequate steps were taken by Mr McCann, the SA Police and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to obtain from Mr Clarke information which was relevant to the issues.

      (9)       Whether the processes undertaken in response to the issues up to and including the provision of the report prepared by Mr McCann were reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances.

     (10)      Whether there were any material deficiencies in the manner in which Mr McCann conducted his investigation of the issues.

     (11)      Whether it would have been appropriate to have made public the report prepared by Mr McCann.

     (12)      Whether Mr Ashbourne, during the course of his ordinary employment, engaged in any (and, if so, what) activity or discussions to advance the personal interests of the Attorney-General and, if so, whether any Minister had knowledge of, or authorised, such activity or discussion.

     (13)      Whether Mr Ashbourne undertook any and, if so, what actions to "rehabilitate" Mr Clarke, or the former Member for Price, Mr Murray DeLaine, or any other person into the Australian Labor Party and, if so, whether such actions were undertaken with the knowledge, authority or approval of the Premier or any Minister.

     (14)      With reference to the contents of the statement issued on 1 July 2005 by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Stephen Pallaras QC:

      (a)       what was the substance of the "complaint about the conduct of the Premier's legal advisor, Mr Alexandrides";

      (b)      what was the substance of the "telephone call made [by Mr Alexandrides] to the prosecutor involved in the Ashbourne case";

      (c)       what were the "serious issues of inappropriate conduct" relating to Mr Alexandrides;

      (d)      whether the responses of the Premier, the Attorney-General or any Minister or Mr Alexandrides or any other person to the issues mentioned in the Director of Public Prosecutions' statement were appropriate and timely; and

      (e)       whether any person made any statement concerning the issues referred to in the Director of Public Prosecutions' statement which was misleading, inaccurate or dishonest in any material particular.

     (15)      Whether it would be appropriate in future to refer any credible allegation of improper conduct on the part of a Minister or ministerial adviser (that has not already been referred to the police) to the Solicitor-General in the first instance for investigation and advice.

     (16)      If the reference of such an allegation to the Solicitor-General would not be appropriate (in general or in a particular case) or would not be possible because of the Solicitor-General’s absence or for some other reason, who would be an alternative person to whom it would be appropriate to refer such an allegation in the first instance for investigation and advice.

       (17)    What action should be taken in relation to any of the matters arising out of the consideration by the Inquiry of these terms of reference.

       The Special Commissioner must not, in the Inquiry or report on the Inquiry, purport to make any finding of criminal or civil liability.”.

                          The Hon. S. M. Kanck moved on page 3, after line 36, to insert new schedule as follows:

Special Commission
of Inquiry (Powers
and Immunities)
Bill.

 

 

“Schedule 1—Terms of reference

To inquire into and report upon the following matters:

      (1)       Whether the Premier or any Minister, ministerial adviser or public servant participated in any activity or discussions concerning:

      (a)       the possible appointment of Mr Ralph Clarke to a government board or position; or

      (b)      the means of facilitating recovery by Mr Clarke of costs incurred by him in connection with a defamation action between Mr Clarke and Attorney-General Atkinson.

(The activity and discussions and events surrounding them are referred to in these terms as "the issues".)

      (2)       If so, the content and nature of such activity or discussions.

      (3)       Whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser authorised any such discussions or whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser was aware of the discussions at the time they were occurring or subsequently.

      (4)       Whether the conduct (including acts of commission or omission) of the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser or public servant contravened any law or Code of Conduct; or whether such conduct was improper or failed to comply with appropriate standards of probity and integrity.

 

 

 

      (5)       Whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser made any statement in relation to the issues which was misleading, inaccurate or dishonest in any material particular.

      (6)       The failure of the Premier, the Deputy Premier, the Attorney-General and the, then, Minister for Police to report the issue in the first instance to the Anti-Corruption Branch of the SA Police.

      (7)       Whether the actions taken by the Premier and Ministers in relation to the issues were appropriate and consistent with proper standards of probity and public administration and, in particular:

      (a)       why no public disclosure of the issues was made until June 2003;

      (b)      why Mr Randall Ashbourne was reprimanded in December 2002 and whether that action was appropriate;

      (c)       whether the appointment of Mr. Warren McCann to investigate the issues was appropriate;

      (d)      whether actions taken in response to the report prepared by Mr McCann were appropriate.

      (8)       What processes and investigations the Auditor-General undertook and whether the Auditor-General was furnished with adequate and appropriate material upon which to base the conclusions reflected in his letter dated 20 December 2002 to the Premier.

      (9)       Whether adequate steps were taken by Mr. McCann, the SA Police and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to obtain from Mr Clarke information which was relevant to the issues.

     (10)      Whether the processes undertaken in response to the issues up to and including the provision of the report prepared by Mr. McCann were reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances.

     (11)      Whether there were any material deficiencies in the manner in which Mr. McCann conducted his investigation of the issues.

     (12)      Whether it would have been appropriate to have made public the report prepared by Mr McCann.

     (13)      The matters investigated and all the evidence and submissions obtained by and any recommendations made by the Anti-Corruption Branch of the SA Police.

     (14)      Whether Mr Ashbourne, during the course of his ordinary employment, engaged in any (and, if so, what) activity or discussions to advance the personal interests of the Attorney-General and, if so, whether any Minister had knowledge of, or authorised, such activity or discussion.

     (15)      Whether Mr Ashbourne undertook any and, if so, what actions to "rehabilitate" Mr Clarke, or the former Member for Price, Mr Murray DeLaine, or any other person into the Australian Labor Party and, if so, whether such actions were undertaken with the knowledge, authority or approval of the Premier or any Minister.

     (16)      The propriety of the Attorney-General contacting journalists covering the Ashbourne case in the District Court, during the trial, and the nature of those conversations.

     (17)      With reference to the contents of the statement issued on 1 July 2005 by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Stephen Pallaras QC:

      (a)       what was the substance of the "complaint about the conduct of the Premier's legal advisor, Mr Alexandrides";

      (b)      what was the substance of the "telephone call made [by Mr Alexandrides] to the prosecutor involved in the Ashbourne case";

      (c)       what were the "serious issues of inappropriate conduct" relating to Mr Alexandrides;

      (d)      whether the responses of the Premier, the Attorney-General or any Minister or Mr Alexandrides or any other person to the issues mentioned in the Director of Public Prosecutions' statement were appropriate and timely; and

      (e)       whether any person made any statement concerning the issues referred to in the Director of Public Prosecutions' statement which was misleading, inaccurate or dishonest in any material particular.

     (18)      Whether it would be appropriate in future to refer any credible allegation of improper conduct on the part of a Minister or ministerial adviser (that has not already been referred to the police) to the Solicitor-General in the first instance for investigation and advice.

     (19)      If the reference of such an allegation to the Solicitor-General would not be appropriate (in general or in a particular case) or would not be possible because of the Solicitor-General’s absence or for some other reason, who would be an alternative person to whom it would be appropriate to refer such an allegation in the first instance for investigation and advice.

     (20)      Whether Mr Alexandrides assisted in framing the Terms of Reference for the Inquiry proposed by the Government in the resolution of the House of Assembly passed on 5 July 2005.

     (21)      What action should be taken in relation to any of the matters arising out of the consideration by the Inquiry of these terms of reference.

       The Special Commissioner must not, in the Inquiry or report on the Inquiry, purport to make any finding of criminal or civil liability.”.

              The Hon. R. D. Lawson, by leave, withdrew his amendment.

 

 

 

                          The Hon. N. Xenophon moved to amend the new schedule as proposed to be inserted by the Hon. S. M. Kanck in subclause (13) after “obtained by” by inserting “and any recommendations made by”.

                          Question - That the amendment moved by the Hon. N. Xenophon to the new schedule, as proposed to be inserted by the Hon. S. M. Kanck, be agreed to - put and passed.

                          Question - That the new schedule, as proposed to be inserted by the Hon. S. M. Kanck and as amended by the Hon. N. Xenophon, be so inserted - put.

 

 

 

             Committee divided:

Ayes, 12

The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins

The Hon. A. L. Evans

The Hon. I. Gilfillan

The Hon. R. D. Lawson

The Hon. R. I. Lucas

The Hon. A. J. Redford

The Hon. K. J. Reynolds

The Hon. D. W. Ridgway

The Hon. C. V. Schaefer

The Hon. J. F. Stefani

The Hon. N. Xenophon

The Hon. S. M. Kanck (Teller)

      So it was resolved in the affirmative.

 

Noes, 4

The Hon. J. M. Gazzola

The Hon. R. K. Sneath

The Hon. C. Zollo

The Hon. P. Holloway (Teller)

 

 

 

                                   New Schedule inserted.

                                   Title agreed to.

____________________

 

                 The President resumed the Chair, and reported that the Committee had considered the Bill and had agreed to the same with amendments; whereupon the Council adopted such report.

                 The Minister for Industry and Trade, pursuant to contingent notice, moved - That the Standing Orders be so far suspended as to enable the Bill to pass through its remaining stages without delay.

                 Question put and passed.

                 Bill read a third time.

                 Resolved - That this Bill do now pass.

                

 

 

21.

The Hon. D. W. Ridgway, according to order, moved – That this Council condemns the Hon. Rory McEwen, Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for State/Local Government Relations and Minister for Forests and Member for Mount Gambier, as the longest serving rural member of the National/Labor Coalition Cabinet, for neglecting the needs of all rural and regional South Australians.

                 And the Hon. D. W. Ridgway having obtained leave to conclude his remarks, the debate was adjourned until Wednesday, 14 September 2005.

 

Hon. Rory McEwen
and the Needs of All
Rural and Regional
South Australians -
Motion re.

 

22.

Ordered - That Order of the Day (Private Business) No. 2 be postponed and taken into consideration on motion.

 

Postponement
of Business.

 

23.

On the Order of the Day being read for the adjourned debate on the motion of the Hon. K. J. Reynolds - That the Government report, by 15 September 2005, on progress achieved with implementing Recommendation 1 of the Parliamentary Social Development Committee’s Poverty Inquiry, tabled on 13 May 2003:

                 Debate resumed.

                 Question put and passed.

                

 

Government
to Report on
Implementation of
Recommendation 1
of the Social
Development
Committee’s
Poverty Inquiry -
Motion re.

 

 

24.

Ordered - That Order of the Day (Private Business) No. 5 be an Order of the Day for Wednesday, 14 September 2005.

 

Postponement
of Business.

 

25.

The following Messages from the House of Assembly were received and read -

Message No. 98

                 MR. PRESIDENT - The House of Assembly has agreed to the amendments made by the Legislative Council in the Citrus Industry Bill without amendment.

House of Assembly, 7 July 2005.                                                                               R. B. SUCH, Speaker.

 

Messages from
House of Assembly:
Citrus
Industry Bill.

 

 

 

Message No. 99

                 MR. PRESIDENT - The House of Assembly has agreed to the amendments made by the Legislative Council in the Parliamentary Superannuation (Scheme for New Members) Amendment Bill without amendment.

House of Assembly, 7 July 2005.                                                                               R. B. SUCH, Speaker.

 

Parliamentary Superannuation (Scheme for New Members) Amendment Bill.

 

 

 

Message No. 100

                 MR. PRESIDENT - The House of Assembly has agreed to the amendments made by the Legislative Council in the Heritage (Heritage Directions) Amendment Bill without amendment.

House of Assembly, 7 July 2005.                                                                               R. B. SUCH, Speaker.

 

Heritage (Heritage Directions) Amendment Bill.

 

 

26.

The Minister for Industry and Trade, without notice, moved - That the Standing Orders be so far suspended as to enable the sitting of the Council to be extended beyond 6.30 p.m. to complete the Business of the Day.

                 Question put and passed, without a dissentient voice, there being present an absolute majority of the whole number of Members of the Council.

 

Suspension
of Standing
Orders.

 

27.

The following Message from the House of Assembly was received and read -

Message No. 101

                 MR. PRESIDENT - The House of Assembly has disagreed to the amendments made by the Legislative Council in the Special Commission of Inquiry (Powers and Immunities) Bill as indicated in the annexed Schedule.  The House of Assembly returns the Bill herewith and desires its reconsideration.

House of Assembly, 7 July 2005.                                                                               R. B. SUCH, Speaker.

 

Message from
House of Assembly:
Special Commission of Inquiry (Powers and Immunities) Bill.

 

 

 

Schedule of the amendments made by the Legislative Council

to which the House of Assembly has disagreed

No. 1

Clause 3, page 2, lines 13 and 14—

Delete all words in these lines and substitute:

reference as set out in Schedule 1.

No. 2.

Clause 4, page 2, line 24—

Delete paragraph (a) and substitute:

      (a)       section 18(3)(c) and (6); and

No. 3.

Page 2, after line 26—

Insert:

4A—Hearings in public or private

The Special Commissioner may obtain evidence and evidentiary material for the Inquiry by means of hearings conducted in public or private.

No. 4.

Clause 5, page 3, lines 5, 6 and 7—

Delete subclause (2).

No. 5.

Page 3, after line 26—

Insert:

6A—Statements by witness not admissible against witness

A statement or disclosure made by a witness in answer to a question put to the witness, or in evidentiary material produced by the witness, for the purposes of the Inquiry will not (except in proceedings for an offence against this Act or for contempt) be admissible in evidence against the witness in any civil or criminal proceedings in any court.

No. 6.

Page 3, after line 36—

Insert:

Schedule 1—Terms of reference

To inquire into and report upon the following matters:

      (1)       Whether the Premier or any Minister, ministerial adviser or public servant participated in any activity or discussions concerning:

      (a)       the possible appointment of Mr Ralph Clarke to a government board or position; or

      (b)      the means of facilitating recovery by Mr Clarke of costs incurred by him in connection with a defamation action between Mr Clarke and Attorney-General Atkinson

(The activity and discussions and events surrounding them are referred to in these terms as "the issues".)

      (2)       If so, the content and nature of such activity or discussions.

      (3)       Whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser authorised any such discussions or whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser was aware of the discussions at the time they were occurring or subsequently.

      (4)       Whether the conduct (including acts of commission or omission) of the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser or public servant contravened any law or Code of Conduct; or whether such conduct was improper or failed to comply with appropriate standards of probity and integrity.

      (5)       Whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser made any statement in relation to the issues which was misleading, inaccurate or dishonest in any material particular.

      (6)       The failure of the Premier, the Deputy Premier, the Attorney-General and the, then, Minister for Police to report the issue in the first instance to the Anti-Corruption Branch of the SA Police.

      (7)       Whether the actions taken by the Premier and Ministers in relation to the issues were appropriate and consistent with proper standards of probity and public administration and, in particular:

      (a)       why no public disclosure of the issues was made until June 2003;

      (b)      why Mr Randall Ashbourne was reprimanded in December 2002 and whether that action was appropriate;

      (c)       whether the appointment of Mr Warren McCann to investigate the issues was appropriate;

      (d)      whether actions taken in response to the report prepared by Mr McCann were appropriate.

      (8)       What processes and investigations the Auditor-General undertook and whether the Auditor-General was furnished with adequate and appropriate material upon which to base the conclusions reflected in his letter dated 20 December 2002 to the Premier.

      (9)       Whether adequate steps were taken by Mr McCann, the SA Police and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to obtain from Mr Clarke information which was relevant to the issues.

     (10)      Whether the processes undertaken in response to the issues up to and including the provision of the report prepared by Mr McCann were reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances.

     (11)      Whether there were any material deficiencies in the manner in which Mr McCann conducted his investigation of the issues.

     (12)      Whether it would have been appropriate to have made public the report prepared by Mr McCann.

     (13)      The matters investigated and all the evidence and submissions obtained by and any recommendations made by the Anti-Corruption Branch of the SA Police.

     (14)      Whether Mr Ashbourne, during the course of his ordinary employment, engaged in any (and, if so, what) activity or discussions to advance the personal interests of the Attorney-General and, if so, whether any Minister had knowledge of, or authorised, such activity or discussion.

     (15)      Whether Mr Ashbourne undertook any and, if so, what actions to "rehabilitate" Mr Clarke, or the former Member for Price, Mr Murray DeLaine, or any other person into the Australian Labor Party and, if so, whether such actions were undertaken with the knowledge, authority or approval of the Premier or any Minister.

     (16)      The propriety of the Attorney-General contacting journalists covering the Ashbourne case in the District Court, during the trial, and the nature of those conversations.

     (17)      With reference to the contents of the statement issued on 1 July 2005 by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Stephen Pallaras QC:

      (a)       what was the substance of the "complaint about the conduct of the Premier's legal advisor, Mr Alexandrides";

      (b)      what was the substance of the "telephone call made [by Mr Alexandrides] to the prosecutor involved in the Ashbourne case";

      (c)       what were the "serious issues of inappropriate conduct" relating to Mr Alexandrides;

      (d)      whether the responses of the Premier, the Attorney-General or any Minister or Mr Alexandrides or any other person to the issues mentioned in the Director of Public Prosecutions' statement were appropriate and timely; and

      (e)       whether any person made any statement concerning the issues referred to in the Director of Public Prosecutions' statement which was misleading, inaccurate or dishonest in any material particular.

     (18)      Whether it would be appropriate in future to refer any credible allegation of improper conduct on the part of a Minister or ministerial adviser (that has not already been referred to the police) to the Solicitor-General in the first instance for investigation and advice.

     (19)      If the reference of such an allegation to the Solicitor-General would not be appropriate (in general or in a particular case) or would not be possible because of the Solicitor-General’s absence or for some other reason, who would be an alternative person to whom it would be appropriate to refer such an allegation in the first instance for investigation and advice.

     (20)      Whether Mr Alexandrides assisted in framing the Terms of Reference for the Inquiry proposed by the Government in the resolution of the House of Assembly passed on 5 July 2005.

     (21)      What action should be taken in relation to any of the matters arising out of the consideration by the Inquiry of these terms of reference. 

The Special Commissioner must not, in the Inquiry or report on the Inquiry, purport to make any finding of criminal or civil liability.

D. A. BRIDGES, Clerk of the House of Assembly.

 

 

 

                 Ordered - That the Message be taken into consideration forthwith.

                 The President then left the Chair, and the Council resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole for the consideration of the Message.

 

In the Committee

 

                          The Minister for Industry and Trade moved - That the Council do not insist on its amendments.

                          Question - That the amendments be insisted on - put.

 

 

 

             Committee divided:

Ayes, 12

The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins

The Hon. A. L. Evans

The Hon. I. Gilfillan

The Hon. S. M. Kanck

The Hon. R. I. Lucas

The Hon. A. J. Redford

The Hon. K. J. Reynolds

The Hon. D. W. Ridgway

The Hon. C. V. Schaefer

The Hon. J. F. Stefani

The Hon. N. Xenophon

The Hon. R. D. Lawson (Teller)

      So it was resolved in the affirmative.

 

Noes, 4

The Hon. J. M. Gazzola

The Hon. R. K. Sneath

The Hon. C. Zollo

The Hon. P. Holloway (Teller)

 

 

 

_____________________

 

                 The President resumed the Chair, and reported accordingly; whereupon the Council adopted such report.

 

 

 

28.

Ordered - That the Council, at its rising, do adjourn until Monday, 12 September 2005, at fifteen minutes past two o’clock.

 

Next Day
 of Sitting.

 

29.

The following Message from the House of Assembly was received and read -

Message No. 102

                 MR. PRESIDENT - The House of Assembly has passed the Bill transmitted herewith entitled an Act to amend the Children’s Protection Act 1993; and to make a related amendment to the Family and Community Services Act 1972, to which it desires the concurrence of the Legislative Council.

House of Assembly, 7 July 2005.                                                                               R. B. SUCH, Speaker.

                 Bill read a first time.

                 Ordered - That the second reading be an Order of the Day for next day of sitting.

 

Message from
House of Assembly:
Children’s
Protection
(Keeping Them Safe)
Amendment Bill.
.

 

30.

The Hon. R. D. Lawson, according to order, moved -

       I.      That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into and report on all matters relating to the Atkinson/Ashbourne/Clarke Affair.  In its inquiry, the Select Committee should examine -

(a)     Whether the Premier, any Minister, Ministerial adviser or public servant, participated in any activity or discussions concerning:

         (i)   the possible appointment of Mr. Ralph Clarke to a Government board position; or

        (ii)   the means of facilitating recovery by Mr. Clarke of costs incurred by him in connection with a defamation action between Mr. Clarke and Attorney-General Atkinson.

         (The said matters and the circumstances and events surrounding them are hereafter described as “the issues”.)

(b)    If so, the content and nature of such activity or discussions.

(c)     Did the Premier, any Minister or Ministerial adviser authorise any such discussions, or was the Premier, any Minister or Ministerial adviser, aware of the discussions at the time they were occurring or subsequently?

Atkinson/
Ashbourne/Clarke Affair -
Motion for Select Committee on.

 

 

 

(d)    Did the conduct (including acts of commission or omission) of the Premier, any Minister, Ministerial adviser or public servant contravene any law or Code of Conduct; or was such conduct improper or did it fail to comply with appropriate standards of probity and integrity?

(e)     Whether the Premier, any Minister or Ministerial adviser made any statement in relation to the issues which was misleading, inaccurate or dishonest in any material particular.

(f)     Whether the actions taken by the Premier and Ministers in relation to the issues were appropriate and consistent with proper standards of probity and public administration and, in particular -

         (i)   Why no public disclosure of the issues was made until June 2003?

        (ii)   Why the issues were not reported to the Police in November 2002, and whether that failure was appropriate?

       (iii)   Why Mr. Randall Ashbourne was reprimanded in December 2002 and whether that action was appropriate?

       (iv)   Whether the appointment of Mr. Warren McCann to investigate the issues was appropriate.

        (v)   Whether actions taken in response to the report prepared by Mr. McCann (the McCann Report) were appropriate.

(g)    What processes and investigations did the Auditor-General undertake and was the Auditor-General furnished with adequate and appropriate material upon which to base the conclusions reflected in his letter dated 20 December 2002 to the Premier.

(h)    Whether adequate steps were taken by Mr. McCann, the SA Police and the Officer of the Director of Public Prosecutions, to obtain from Mr. Clarke information which was relevant to the issues.

(i)      Whether Mr. Ashbourne, during the course of his ordinary employment, engaged in any (and, if so, what) activity or discussions to advance the personal interests of the Attorney-General and, if so, whether any Minister had knowledge of, or authorised, such activity or discussion.

(j)      Whether Mr. Ashbourne undertook any and, if so, what, actions to “rehabilitate” Mr. Clarke, or the former Member for Price, Mr. Murray DeLaine, or any other person into the Australian Labor Party and, if so, whether such actions were undertaken with the knowledge, authority or approval of the Premier or any Minister.

(k)     With reference to the contents of the statement issued on 1 July 2005 by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr. Stephen Pallaras, Q.C.:

         (i)   What was the substance of the “complaint about the conduct of the Premier’s Legal Adviser, Mr. Alexandrides?

        (ii)   What was the substance of the “telephone call made [by Mr. Alexandrides] to the prosecutor involved in the Ashbourne case?

       (iii)   What were the “serious issues of inappropriate conduct” of Mr. Alexandrides?

       (iv)   Were the responses and actions of the Premier, any Minister, the Attorney-General, Mr. Alexandrides, or any other person, to the issues mentioned in the DPP’s statement appropriate and timely?

        (v)   Whether any person has made any statement concerning the issues referred to in the DPP’s statement which was misleading, inaccurate or dishonest in any material particular.

(l)      What action should be taken in relation to any of the matters arising out of the consideration by the Inquiry of these terms of reference?

      II.      That Standing Order No. 389 be so far suspended as to enable the Chairperson of the Committee to have a deliberative vote only.

    III.      That this Council permits the Select Committee to authorise the disclosure or publication, as it sees fit, of any evidence or documents presented to the Committee prior to such evidence being reported to the Council.

    IV.      That Standing Order No. 396 be suspended to enable strangers to be admitted when the Select Committee is examining witnesses unless the Committee otherwise resolves, but they shall be excluded when the Committee is deliberating.”.

                 The Hon. S. M. Kanck moved to amend the motion in paragraph I, by leaving out all words after “That a Select Committee be appointed” and inserting:

“to inquire into and report upon the following matters:

 

 

 

      (1)       Whether the Premier or any Minister, ministerial adviser or public servant participated in any activity or discussions concerning:

      (a)       the possible appointment of Mr Ralph Clarke to a government board or position; or

      (b)      the means of facilitating recovery by Mr Clarke of costs incurred by him in connection with a defamation action between Mr Clarke and Attorney-General Atkinson

(The activity and discussions and events surrounding them are referred to in these terms as "the issues".)

      (2)       If so, the content and nature of such activity or discussions.

      (3)       Whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser authorised any such discussions or whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser was aware of the discussions at the time they were occurring or subsequently.

      (4)       Whether the conduct (including acts of commission or omission) of the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser or public servant contravened any law or Code of Conduct; or whether such conduct was improper or failed to comply with appropriate standards of probity and integrity.

      (5)       Whether the Premier or any Minister or ministerial adviser made any statement in relation to the issues which was misleading, inaccurate or dishonest in any material particular.

      (6)       The failure of the Premier, the Deputy Premier, the Attorney-General and the, then, Minister for Police to report the issue in the first instance to the Anti-Corruption Branch of the SA Police.

      (7)       Whether the actions taken by the Premier and Ministers in relation to the issues were appropriate and consistent with proper standards of probity and public administration and, in particular:

      (a)       why no public disclosure of the issues was made until June 2003;

      (b)      why Mr Randall Ashbourne was reprimanded in December 2002 and whether that action was appropriate;

      (c)       whether the appointment of Mr Warren McCann to investigate the issues was appropriate;

      (d)      whether actions taken in response to the report prepared by Mr McCann were appropriate.

      (8)       What processes and investigations the Auditor-General undertook and whether the Auditor-General was furnished with adequate and appropriate material upon which to base the conclusions reflected in his letter dated 20 December 2002 to the Premier.

      (9)       Whether adequate steps were taken by Mr McCann, the SA Police and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to obtain from Mr Clarke information which was relevant to the issues.

     (10)      Whether the processes undertaken in response to the issues up to and including the provision of the report prepared by Mr McCann were reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances.

     (11)      Whether there were any material deficiencies in the manner in which Mr McCann conducted his investigation of the issues.

     (12)      Whether it would have been appropriate to have made public the report prepared by Mr McCann.

     (13)      The matters investigated and all the evidence and submissions obtained by and any recommendations made by the Anti-Corruption Branch of the SA Police.

     (14)      Whether Mr Ashbourne, during the course of his ordinary employment, engaged in any (and, if so, what) activity or discussions to advance the personal interests of the Attorney-General and, if so, whether any Minister had knowledge of, or authorised, such activity or discussion.

     (15)      Whether Mr Ashbourne undertook any and, if so, what actions to "rehabilitate" Mr Clarke, or the former Member for Price, Mr Murray DeLaine, or any other person into the Australian Labor Party and, if so, whether such actions were undertaken with the knowledge, authority or approval of the Premier or any Minister.-*9

 

 

 

     (16)      The propriety of the Attorney-General contacting journalists covering the Ashbourne case in the District Court, during the trial, and the nature of those conversations.

     (17)      With reference to the contents of the statement issued on 1 July 2005 by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Stephen Pallaras QC:

      (a)       what was the substance of the "complaint about the conduct of the Premier's legal advisor, Mr Alexandrides";

      (b)      what was the substance of the "telephone call made [by Mr Alexandrides] to the prosecutor involved in the Ashbourne case";

      (c)       what were the "serious issues of inappropriate conduct" relating to Mr Alexandrides;

      (d)      whether the responses of the Premier, the Attorney-General or any Minister or Mr Alexandrides or any other person to the issues mentioned in the Director of Public Prosecutions' statement were appropriate and timely; and

      (e)       whether any person made any statement concerning the issues referred to in the Director of Public Prosecutions' statement which was misleading, inaccurate or dishonest in any material particular.

     (18)      Whether it would be appropriate in future to refer any credible allegation of improper conduct on the part of a Minister or ministerial adviser (that has not already been referred to the police) to the Solicitor-General in the first instance for investigation and advice.

     (19)      If the reference of such an allegation to the Solicitor-General would not be appropriate (in general or in a particular case) or would not be possible because of the Solicitor-General’s absence or for some other reason, who would be an alternative person to whom it would be appropriate to refer such an allegation in the first instance for investigation and advice.

     (20)      Whether Mr Alexandrides assisted in framing the Terms of Reference for the Inquiry proposed by the Government in the resolution of the House of Assembly passed on 5 July 2005.

     (21)      What action should be taken in relation to any of the matters arising out of the consideration by the Inquiry of these terms of reference.

The Select Committee must not, in the course of its inquiry or Report, purport to make any finding of criminal or civil liability.”.

                 Question - That the amendment moved by the Hon. S. M. Kanck to the motion moved by the Hon. R. D. Lawson, be agreed to - put and passed.

                 Question - That the motion moved by the Hon. R. D. Lawson, as amended by the Hon. S. M. Kanck, be agreed to - put.

 

 

 

             Committee divided:

Ayes, 12

The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins

The Hon. A. L. Evans

The Hon. I. Gilfillan

The Hon. S. M. Kanck

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink

The Hon. R. I. Lucas

The Hon. K. J. Reynolds

The Hon. D. W. Ridgway

The Hon. C. V. Schaefer

The Hon. J. F. Stefani

The Hon. N. Xenophon

The Hon. R. D. Lawson (Teller)

      So it was resolved in the affirmative.

 

Noes, 4

The Hon. J. M. Gazzola

The Hon. R. K. Sneath

The Hon. C. Zollo

The Hon. P. Holloway (Teller)

 

 

 

                 The Hon. R. D. Lawson then moved - That the Select Committee consist of the Minister for Industry and Trade, the Hon. S. M. Kanck, the Hon. R. I. Lucas, the Hon. R. K. Sneath and the mover.

                 Question put and passed.

                 The Hon. R. D. Lawson then moved - That the Select Committee have power to send for persons, papers and records, to adjourn from place to place, and to report on Wednesday, 30 November 2005.

             Question put and passed.

 

Select Committee Appointed.

 

31.

The Minister for Industry and Trade reported as follows:

                 I have to report that the Managers have been to the Conference on the Correctional Services (Parole) Amendment Bill which was managed on behalf of the House of Assembly by the Attorney-General (The Hon. M. J. Atkinson), Ms. Chapman, Ms. Rankine, the Hon. W. Matthew and Mr. Rau, and the Council Managers there delivered the Bill, together with the Resolution adopted by this Council, and thereupon the Managers of the two Houses conferred together, and it was agreed that we should recommend to our respective Houses that -

        As to Amendment No. 1.

That the House of Assembly amend its Amendment by deleting from proposed subsection (2)(b) of section 66 -

         “(but the regulations may not exclude a prisoner liable to serve a total period of imprisonment of 3 years or less)”

and that the Legislative Coucnil agree thereto.

        As to Amendment No. 2.

That the Legislative Council no longer insist on its disagreement to these Amendments.

 

Correctional Services
(Parole)
Amendment Bill.

 

32.

Council adjourned at nineteen minutes to eight o’clock until Monday, 12 September 2005, at fifteen minutes past two o’clock.

 

Adjournment.

 

 

_________________________

 

 

 

 

 

 

Members present during any part of the sitting:

 

 

 

 

The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins

The Hon. A. L. Evans

The Hon. G. E. Gago

The Hon. J. M. Gazzola

The Hon. I. Gilfillan

The Hon. P. Holloway

The Hon. S. M. Kanc

The Hon. R. D. Lawson

The Hon. J.M.A. Lensink

The Hon. R. I. Lucas

The Hon. A. J. Redford

The Hon. K. J. Reynolds

The Hon. D. W. Ridgway

The Hon. C. V. Schaefer

 

The Hon. R. K. Sneath

The Hon. J. F. Stefani

The Hon. T. J. Stephens

The Hon. N. Xenophon

The Hon. C. Zollo

 

 

 

Member absent on leave - The Hon. T. G. Roberts