House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Personal Explanation Personal Explanation Statutes Amendment (Prohibition of Human Cloning for Reproduction and Regulation of Research Involving Human Embryos) Bill STATUTES AMENDMENT (PROHIBITION OF HUMAN CLONING FOR REPRODUCTION AND REGULATION OF RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN EMBRYOS) BILL The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly Kaurna Minister for Health Minister for the Southern Suburbs Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts The Hon. J.D. HILL (Kaurna—Minister for Health, Minister for the Southern Suburbs, Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts) (12:35): I seek leave to make a personal explanation. Leave granted. The Hon. J.D. HILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.D. HILL: A few minutes ago, the member for Davenport raised an issue allegedly of privilege. He alleged that my second reading explanation which was tabled in this place some little time ago misled the house. For the benefit of members, I read to them what the paragraph he alleges was misleading says. On page 3 of my second reading speech it says: State and territory governments are considering the relevant Commonwealth amendments and their implications for local laws— a true statement— The Victorian, New South Wales and Queensland Parliaments have amended their equivalent legislation— a true statement— and Tasmania and Western Australia have tabled amendment bills— a true statement— This parliament now has an opportunity to consider changes to these challenging but important laws— a true statement. It is true that, the Western Australian government having tabled the bills, the Western Australian parliament dealt with the matter in such a way that the legislation failed. I did not say that it had passed the Western Australian parliament, I merely said it had been tabled. This second reading explanation was originally moved a year or so ago and, at that time, the Western Australian parliament had not dealt with it. When parliament resumed, I reintroduced the legislation and, of course, used the same second reading speech. It did not contain the changes and a range of things have happened since that event. In my response to the contributions today, I was intending to fill in the house on recent events, including the fact that Western Australia had not passed the legislation. So, if I have confused members by not having done that sooner, I do apologise to them, but I would have thought anyone who was following this matter would have known that the Western Australian parliament had not passed the legislation. The member also referred to an email. I am not aware of that email. I will certainly ask my office to see whether it has been received. I do not believe I have misled the parliament. The second reading speech contained statements of fact. There are other facts that have occurred subsequently, but it is not contradicting what I have said in this document.