<!--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="2009-10-27" />
  <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="4389" />
  <endPage num="4491" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Law and Order Issues Postcard</name>
      <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000694">
        <heading>LAW AND ORDER ISSUES POSTCARD</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="1804" kind="question">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Bragg</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2009-10-27">
            <name>LAW AND ORDER ISSUES POSTCARD</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2009-10-27T15:10:00" />
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000695">
          <timeStamp time="2009-10-27T15:10:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg) (15:10):</by>  Is the Attorney-General aware of section 85N of the Crimes Act 1914? It provides:</text>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000696">
          <inserted>A person shall not intentionally cause an article in the course of post to be delivered to, or received by, a person other than the person to whom it is directed or that person's authorised agent. Penalty: Imprisonment for 1 year.</inserted>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Croydon</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Attorney-General</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Justice</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Multicultural Affairs</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Veterans' Affairs</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2009-10-27">
            <name>LAW AND ORDER ISSUES POSTCARD</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2009-10-27T15:10:00" />
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000697">
          <timeStamp time="2009-10-27T15:10:00" />
          <by role="member" id="531">The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON (Croydon—Attorney-General, Minister for Justice, Minister for Multicultural Affairs, Minister for Veterans' Affairs) (15:10):</by>  Back in the 1990s I caused to be distributed a DL postcard-style leaflet calling on the Liberal government to support my private member's bill to abolish the drunk's defence. I think members opposite will recall that—</text>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000698">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="56">An honourable member interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000699">
          <by role="member" id="531">The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON:</by>  Indeed. I also caused to be printed a DL calling upon the then Liberal government to change its position on an extended right to self-defence of householders in their own home in the aftermath of a case in my electorate of Mr Geisler, members will recall. Indeed, the DLs were in the form of calling upon Trevor Griffin, the attorney-general of blessed memory, to change his stand on these things. I think there might have been only about 11 of us in the house at the time—the Tarago parliamentary Labor Party. To try to make these DLs have a greater impact I recall going out driving with the now member for West Torrens letterboxing them—</text>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000700">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="56">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000701">
          <by role="member" id="531">The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON:</by>  —I don't drive—in streets in the metropolitan area containing a Liberal MP. So, most of you had your street letterboxed to give the impression we had letterboxed the entire metropolitan Adelaide. Now, we got many thousands of responses to that DL. We know that the current DL is hurting the parliamentary Liberal Party. That is why these questions are being asked. We feel your pain.</text>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000702">The fact of the matter is that in this chamber—and it is on the <term>Hansard</term> record—in the committee stage of the bill on young offenders, the parliamentary Liberal Party took the position that we could not use the expression 'recidivist youth offenders' in the bill, because that would stigmatise members of the Gang of 49 and others. Apparently, calling them 'little turds, shits and wankers' doesn't stigmatise them.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3118">
        <name>Mr GRIFFITHS</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000703">
          <by role="member" id="3118">Mr GRIFFITHS:</by>  Point of order. It is a standard question to the Attorney-General. It is a matter of relevance to a specific question that was asked. His comments have no issue with it.</text>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000704">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="56">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="627">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000705">
          <by role="member" id="627">The SPEAKER:  </by>Order! The problem was that the question was not specific. The Attorney-General.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000706">
          <by role="member" id="531">The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON:</by>  I know that when the member for Bragg says her bedtime prayers in the evening, she says, 'I give thanks, Oh Lord, that I am not as others who stigmatise young offenders.' It is on the parliamentary record that the parliamentary Liberal Party wants to oppose this bill unless the government drops its—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000707">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  Point of order. The bill that is being referred to is currently before the house, and, therefore, ought not be referred to. My question was: is the Attorney-General aware of a certain section of the Crimes Act? It has nothing to do with what he is talking about.</text>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000708">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="56">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="627">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="200910273daa22f665bb411990000709">
          <by role="member" id="627">The SPEAKER:  </by>Order!</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>