<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2009-06-18" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>51</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>3</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="3281" />
  <endPage num="3346" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding>
    <name>Bills</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Bail (Arson) Amendment Bill</name>
      <text id="200906185e0a75edd7f1412090000004">
        <heading>BAIL (ARSON) AMENDMENT BILL</heading>
      </text>
      <subproceeding>
        <name>Second Reading</name>
        <text id="200906185e0a75edd7f1412090000005">
          <heading>Second Reading</heading>
        </text>
        <text id="200906185e0a75edd7f1412090000006">Adjourned debate on second reading.</text>
        <text id="200906185e0a75edd7f1412090000007">(Continued from 30 April 2009. Page 2517.)</text>
        <talker role="member" id="2819" kind="speech">
          <name>The Hon. R.B. SUCH</name>
          <house>House of Assembly</house>
          <electorate id="">Fisher</electorate>
          <startTime time="2009-06-18T10:33:00" />
          <text id="200906185e0a75edd7f1412090000008">
            <timeStamp time="2009-06-18T10:33:00" />
            <by role="member" id="2819">The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (10:33):</by>  I wish to make a brief contribution. Within the general scope of arson, I recently made a submission to the Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission, suggesting—and I have done the same here to the relevant minister—that where someone has a conviction for arson, they be required to stay in their house on an extreme bushfire day or be confined to a geographical area. It might be, say, within a township so that they do not go on to do further damage to the community.</text>
          <text id="200906185e0a75edd7f1412090000009">As we know, we have had the very successful Operation Nomad, but I believe that ties up something like 40 police to operate that program in trying to keep an eye on would-be arsonists or those who are going to commit further arson. So, I put the suggestion that people with a conviction for arson be confined to their house and required to stay in their house on an extreme bushfire day or, as part of that, be confined to a township or an area where they are not likely to cause harm by lighting fires.</text>
          <text id="200906185e0a75edd7f1412090000010">Debate adjourned on motion of Mrs Geraghty.</text>
        </talker>
      </subproceeding>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>