ORGANISED CRIME

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite—Leader of the Opposition) (14:27): My question is to the Premier. What were the reasons for the government's rejection of the model of the DPP, Mr Stephen Pallaras, for tackling organised crime? It was reported in June last year that government meetings on how to tackle crime associated with bikie gangs and other elements of organised crime had excluded the DPP. After those reports, Mr Pallaras was invited to make a submission to the government, which he did, but which he said on radio today was not acted upon. Mr Pallaras told radio listeners today the government's legislation 'goes soft' and 'misses the point' because 'the legislation continues to tolerate their existence'.

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON (Croydon—Attorney-General, Minister for Justice, Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (14:28): What the DPP said on Leon Byner's program on Radio FIVEaa this morning is that he agreed with the thrust of the government's legislation. He thought that the criticisms of it—and I note some of those criticisms emanate from the Liberal spokesman on legal affairs, the member for Heysen—did not understand what was at stake, and the Director of Public Prosecutions said that, although he supported the legislation, he thought it could go further and like the legislation in China, on the Triads, that it could ban the organisations altogether.

The member for Heysen and the Hon. Mr Wade in another place have canvassed amendments to the government's bill on bikies because they believe in some material respects it goes too far. For instance, the member for Heysen is critical of the decision on whether an outlaw motorcycle gang is to be declared as an organisation under the serious and organised crime bill. That decision, she believes, ought not to be made by the Attorney-General on advice from the Commissioner of Police but it is a decision which should be appealable and the final decision made by the Supreme Court.

Ms Chapman: Hear, hear!

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: And the member for Bragg says, 'Hear, hear!'

Members interjecting:

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: They are off the leash. They are crying out for judicial review, but that is not what the Leader of the Opposition said. He said, 'This bill doesn't go far enough.' But, you see, the opposition speaks with a forked tongue. It has one message for the Leon Byner program on Radio FIVEaa and the commercial television stations—that part is done by the Leader of the Opposition, and he smirks knowingly—and they have another message for the Radio National audience which is delivered by the member for Heysen.

A few months ago, the contradictory messages were on view in the same half hour in debate in this chamber and fortunately all the television cameras and reporters were here to catch it. They wrote it up as it was: a contradiction between the Leader of the Opposition and his spokesman on legal affairs. The Liberal Party, like the Greens and like the Democrats, are seeking to amend the serious and organised crime bill in another place.

Mrs Redmond interjecting:

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: No, 'are'. It is a plural subject.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: No, I must disagree with the member for Heysen on this occasion. It is a plural subject and therefore requires the plural verb 'are': that is, the Parliamentary Liberal Party, the Democrats and Greens are seeking to amend the serious and organised crime bill in another place. All those amendments are in the same direction, that is, watering the bill down.

It seems that the Leader of the Opposition is not aware or does not wish to be aware of what his frontbenchers are doing on the bikie bill. He wants to play both sides of the street, and as a distinguished former member for Unley said in this parliament, 'You will find it on the record. Do the search on Hansard. It is the prerogative of the opposition to have two bob each way.'