House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1) 52 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Ministerial Statement Ministerial Statement Mcgee, Mr Eugene McGEE, MR EUGENE The Hon. M.D. RANN House of Assembly Ramsay Premier Minister for Economic Development Minister for Social Inclusion Minister for the Arts Minister for Sustainability and Climate Change 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) (14:06): I seek leave to make two ministerial statements. Leave granted. The Hon. M.D. RANN House of Assembly The Hon. M.D. RANN: On 30 November 2003, Eugene Norman McGee was the driver of a vehicle which was involved in a collision in the Barossa Valley with a cyclist, Mr Ian Humphrey. Tragically, Mr Humphrey was killed as a result of that collision. It is a matter of record that Eugene McGee failed to stop or render any assistance to Mr Humphrey. Mr McGee had been to lunch with his mother and brother and had consumed alcohol during the course of that afternoon. The trial judge found that Mr McGee failed to contact police for some time. He concealed his vehicle at the Barossa Valley and sought assistance from his brother to return to Adelaide. The judge also found that, in the course of his flight, he passed through a police checkpoint. The trial judge also concluded that Mr McGee and his brother agreed they would do whatever was required to avoid police making contact with Eugene McGee before they returned to Adelaide to see a lawyer. That is the trial judge. Mr McGee was at the time, and still remains, a legal practitioner. His practice includes significant criminal work, and he was plainly aware of his obligation to stop and render assistance. Moreover, he would have been acutely aware that his failure to stop or report immediately to police could compromise the police investigation into his culpability for the collision. McGee was subsequently acquitted of causing death by dangerous driving. He was convicted, on his plea of guilty, for failing to stop and render assistance and fined a mere $3,100. At the time, the maximum penalty for the offence was one year's imprisonment. Since then, the government has amended the law to provide for a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment, where a person flees the scene when a death or serious injury has been caused through careless driving. Mr Humphrey's wife, Di Gilchrist-Humphrey, has campaigned tirelessly for justice for her late husband and for her family. Ms Gilchrist-Humphrey's representations, together with the government's deep concern about the circumstances of the case, led to a royal commission into the incident. Ms Gilchrist-Humphrey was given standing and was represented by counsel at the royal commission. The royal commissioner, in his report, made recommendations for changes to the law which the government has adopted. The changes will ensure trials for these offences are fairer, particularly through the disclosure by defence of expert evidence. Ms Gilchrist-Humphrey has made a complaint against McGee to the Legal Practitioners Conduct Board. The former attorney-general also made a complaint to the board. In this respect, I note that the Legal Practitioners Act provides that misconduct or unprofessional conduct by a practitioner includes, and I want to quote this exactly: ...any offence of a dishonest or infamous nature committed by the legal practitioner in respect of which punishment by imprisonment is prescribed or authorised by law. Ms Gilchrist-Humphrey has asked to be heard to make submissions personally or through her representative to the conduct board prior to the board's determination. Ms Gilchrist-Humphrey, since her husband's tragic and senseless death, has given voice to her family's search for justice, to the community's search for answers and, of course, to justice for her late husband. I am pleased to note that the board has sought further submissions from all complainants prior to making any decision. I believe that this will include Ms Gilchrist-Humphrey. I recognise the board is an independent body and I do not intend by my support to influence the outcome of its deliberations. I have no doubt the decision by the board to allow Ms Gilchrist-Humphrey the opportunity to make submissions will receive strong and widespread public support.