<!--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="2009-09-10" />
  <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="3891" />
  <endPage num="3973" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Ministerial Code of Conduct</name>
      <text id="20090910d2c91a0024734fb590000612">
        <heading>MINISTERIAL CODE OF CONDUCT</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="1813" kind="question">
        <name>Mrs REDMOND</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Heysen</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2009-09-10">
            <name>MINISTERIAL CODE OF CONDUCT</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2009-09-10T15:10:00" />
        <text id="20090910d2c91a0024734fb590000613">
          <timeStamp time="2009-09-10T15:10:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1813">Mrs REDMOND (Heysen—Leader of the Opposition) (15:10):</by>  I ask the Premier a supplementary question. If the Attorney-General did not recklessly attack the reputation of any other person, on what basis did the cabinet decide to pay out $210,000 of taxpayers' money?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="526" kind="interjection">
        <name>The Hon. P.F. Conlon</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20090910d2c91a0024734fb590000614">
          <by role="member" id="526">The Hon. P.F. Conlon:</by>  On crown law advice.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="627">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20090910d2c91a0024734fb590000615">
          <by role="member" id="627">The SPEAKER:  </by>Order!</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="634" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. M.D. RANN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Ramsay</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Premier</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Economic Development</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Social Inclusion</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for the Arts</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Sustainability and Climate Change</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <startTime time="2009-09-10T15:10:00" />
        <page num="3932" />
        <text id="20090910d2c91a0024734fb590000616">
          <timeStamp time="2009-09-10T15:10:00" />
          <by role="member" id="634">The Hon. M.D. RANN (Ramsay—Premier, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Social Inclusion, Minister for the Arts, Minister for Sustainability and Climate Change) (15:10):</by>  We made a decision that it was in the public interest not to go to the massive expense of bringing over a Western Australian judge and setting up a court, because you could not have a judge of this state sitting in judgment on one of our own, or the Attorney-General. We made that judgment, just as judgments were made for payouts and cases relating to a whole series of Liberal ministers.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="526" kind="interjection">
        <name>The Hon. P.F. Conlon</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20090910d2c91a0024734fb590000617">
          <by role="member" id="526">The Hon. P.F. Conlon:</by>  We never indemnified anyone against crown law advice.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="634" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. M.D. RANN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20090910d2c91a0024734fb590000618">
          <by role="member" id="634">The Hon. M.D. RANN:</by>  That's right. The key point is: was the Attorney-General acting honestly and sincerely in his beliefs? Absolutely. Totally. I also came out and condemned Mr Cannon's determinations, but I was not sued. I stand by what I said on that day: both of us honestly and sincerely believed that what he said was wrong. This was all about the choice of a few words for which the Attorney-General apologised. We made the decision to act in the public interest, and that is the difference. You would let out the von Einems, you would let out the McBrides and all the rest of them, because you would rather stand by your mates in the legal profession—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="627">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20090910d2c91a0024734fb590000619">
          <by role="member" id="627">The SPEAKER:  </by>Order! The Premier is now debating.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>