House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Matter of Privilege Matter of Privilege Matter of Privilege MATTER OF PRIVILEGE The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER (18:04): I refer to the matter of privilege raised by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in relation to an inconsistency between the answer the Minister for Health provided to a question without notice this afternoon and the contents of papers tabled in this house yesterday in relation to the remediation of both the Royal Adelaide Hospital site and the Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital site and the effect that such works will have on the Parklands. First, I make the observation again that an inconsistency in the statements made by members or between the statements of members and documents available to the house is not of itself a matter of privilege. The test for a matter of privilege that this house recognises would require, in this case, that the minister was deliberately seeking to mislead the house and the matter could, to quote McGee in Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand, 'generally be regarded as tending to impede or obstruct the house in the discharge of its duties'. In this instance, some regard needs to be paid to the nature of the question asked of the minister by the member for Norwood. The member for Norwood asked the minister: how will the construction of the Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital provide some more open space for South Australians to enjoy? I do not see that the minister's answer was so different from the content of the tabled papers quoted by the deputy leader as to 'genuinely be regarded as tending to impede or obstruct the house from discharge of its duties'. It is incumbent upon the deputy leader, the minister, or any other member, to draw to the attention of the house any inconsistency in information provided to the house. There are numerous opportunities available to all members to do so, and such matters are capable of being debated. For these reasons, I do not propose to give the precedence which would enable any member to pursue this matter immediately as a matter of privilege. This decision does not prevent the deputy leader, or any other member, from proceeding with the motion on the specific matter by giving notice in the usual way.