LEGAL, JUSTICE AND POLICE RETIREMENTS

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg) (11:31): I move:

That this house places on record its appreciation of the exemplary service of Chief Justice John Doyle, Commissioner of Police Mal Hyde and Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Pallaras to the people of South Australia and their contribution to the legal, justice and policing services of the state.

It with pleasure that I move this motion. In this state, we are about to see a change in the guard in the legal fraternity. Just this week debate has progressed and, indeed, passed on the establishment of an Independent Commissioner Against Corruption. On that passing in another place, the government will have the responsibility of appointing a commissioner for the new anticorruption body.

That will establish a new era as of 1 July, if the government have their way in progressing this, in law enforcement in this state. The separation of powers and the doctrines of independence in our state ensure that we also have an independent judiciary, a Director of Public Prosecutions for the prosecution of offences, and enforcement through the police force. It is fair to say that directly the Commissioner of Police is responsible to a minister of the Crown in South Australia but that efforts made in all our legislation to ensure that police maintain independence as to whom they investigate have been a very important aspect of our legal system.

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice John Doyle, will shortly retire after an extraordinary period of service. He was appointed in 1995. Having been educated at St Ignatius College and the University of Adelaide, he completed his studies as a Rhodes scholar at Oxford and appointed Queen's Counsel at the age of 36. He also served our state as solicitor-general for nine years from 1986, and since his appointment in 1995 has led the Supreme Court as Chief Justice.

It has been 17 years of extraordinary commitment to the judicial office that he has held and also in significant law development over that time. Recently, at a special sitting to celebrate 175 years of service of the Supreme Court in South Australia, at which the Chief Justice presided, it was announced that he was only the eighth Chief Justice to serve the court in that role over the last 175 years. Unquestionably, Chief Justice Doyle has proven to be an outstanding jurist with a national reputation.

I have always been disappointed that he—I cannot say invited, he may well have been invited—never took up the opportunity and presented for commission as a member of the High Court of Australia. He was certainly in my view, and I am sure in the view of many in the legal profession, eminently qualified, and if he had taken up that role, I am sure that he would have done South Australia proud as a member of the High Court, and he would have then, of course, been the first member representative of the High Court from South Australia. I hope in my lifetime we have a representative from South Australia, but had he been so, he would have been exemplary.

Members would be aware that he suffered quite a significant accident in France recently, and he brought to our attention that, whilst incapacitated from injuries as a result of that accident, he was not even able to access his own Supreme Court courtrooms. I think this is, again, a reflection on the poor condition of our Supreme Court. I note that the Attorney-General recently announced a $500,000 study into new Supreme Court courtrooms. I think the Chief Justice indicated that he was going to have that promise laminated and displayed in the court. He was impressed that at least that seemed to be opening the file.

I am very disappointed that the government has the capacity to allocate $500,000 to set up a feasibility study for a metals core library. However, when the Chief Justice has come repeatedly to this chamber and told us that he needs in the order of $750,000 just to complete the initial study, such a poor amount of only $500,000 should be allocated to that exercise. But it is a start, and I do not want there to be any backflips on that promise. We want the file to be open and at least that exercise undertaken.

I thank the Chief Justice for his tireless efforts on behalf of all those who have to appear in the superior courts—not just the defendants but the witnesses and, of course, the plaintiffs, and the people who are victims of offences—that they should at least be able to have the dignity of their cases being heard in a place that is sound and approved in terms of occupational health and safety, so that is a good start.

To the Director of Public Prosecutions, Stephen Pallaras QC, I thank him for his service. Mr Pallaras graduated in arts and law from Monash University, served at the Melbourne bar for nine years and had a decade of service as senior counsel in Hong Kong from 1984 to 1994. A crown prosecutor in Western Australia for seven years from 1994 to 2002, he was appointed Queen's Counsel in 2000. Members will remember that Mr Pallaras was appointed South Australia's Director of Public Prosecutions in 2005. He was going to be the great Eliot Ness. I think someone forgot to tell the then premier, Mr Rann, that Eliot Ness was not actually a prosecutor, he was a police investigator but, nevertheless, a minor detail like that did not seem to faze the former premier.

Mr Pallaras was appointed as the Director of Public Prosecutions, and that is an independent statutory role to identify cases that should be prosecuted in our courts. Mr Pallaras has also been vocal on his expectation that it would be inevitable that there would be an anticorruption commission in this state and, as we now know, the government has now collapsed on their previous years of fighting that and agreed to introduce a bill which passed the house this week. I thank Mr Pallaras for his service as our DPP and for his advice. Sadly, much of his advice in his annual reports seemed to be ignored by government but, nevertheless, he was quite a significant contributor to the development of legal reform in this state and I thank him for that.

Finally, I pay tribute to the Commissioner of Police, Mal Hyde. The son of a 37-year veteran policeman, Mr Hyde joined the Victoria Police in 1967 at the age of 16 years, rising to become deputy commissioner of that force from 1993 to 1996. Mr Hyde holds a first class honours degree in law and a Master of Business Administration. He was awarded an Australian Police Medal in 1996 and made an Officer of the Order of Australia in 2008.

Commissioner Hyde has served as Commissioner of South Australia Police for 15 years, since 1997. Commissioner Hyde has become both the longest serving and one of the most highly-respected police leaders in Australia. He has led South Australia Police through a wave of changes, including challenges such as the historic sex offences cases, the 'bodies in the barrel' case and the anti-gangs efforts. Within the force he has changed processes, such as Focus 21, and the establishment of the new police academy and police headquarters have been major achievements.

Commissioner Hyde has had a regular particular interest in professional standards of police innovation and encouraging best practices and new ideas. He, too, operates as a leader on a national level in his role as a member of the Board of Management for the Australian Crime Commission, CrimTrac and as chair of the Australia New Zealand Policing Advisory Authority for the past three years. On behalf the opposition in this chamber, I offer to police commissioner Hyde best wishes for his long and happy retirement in whatever occupations he may undertake.

We know already that Mr Adam Kimber has been appointed to undertake the new role as the Director of Public Prosecutions. He, of course, is highly regarded—another St Ignatius graduate. There must be some hope for my sons who have also graduated from that institution. They of course have gone into the worlds of finance and media, so we will see what happens with them. Nevertheless, they seem to have avoided legal and law enforcement roles in their life, probably taken because of their parents. Nevertheless, I move on.

Mr Kimber has been appointed. He comes with significant legal accolade and credentials, and we wish him well in that role. We look forward to the government's announcement as to who is to become the new Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of South Australia; and I certainly hope that, in their time of office, they see the overseeing of a new and dedicated Supreme Court building for the administration of justice in this state. I commend the motion to the house.

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Planning, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (11:42): Can I start by doing the unusual thing of commending the honourable member for Bragg for bringing this motion to the parliament. We do not always agree. In fact usually we manage to disagree on almost everything, but today I think that I can only endorse the remarks, or at least those that were not attacking me, that the honourable member made in the context of her contribution today.

She has identified in her motion three people of outstanding public service to the state of South Australia, and I think it is only appropriate and reasonable that we in the parliament officially recognise their contributions. I intend to speak briefly about them, but I will probably say less about the police commissioner because my ministerial colleague the Minister for Police is going to be speaking about that, I expect, probably in much more detail.

First, can I just say a few remarks about Chief Justice John Doyle. John Doyle for anyone who knows him is a most remarkable man—a man of enormous balance, great intellect, enormous patience and a truly inspiring leader for the court, both by reason of his temperament and his great capacity for work. He has been a tireless administrator and leader of the court, and I do not think there would be anyone in the legal profession in South Australia who does not have absolutely enormous respect for Chief Justice Doyle. He is a person who has made a substantial impression on everyone who has met him but in a quiet, measured and entirely decent fashion.

I have to say that it is going to be a very difficult task for me as Attorney-General to make recommendations to cabinet to fill the void created by Chief Justice Doyle's departure. As the honourable member for Bragg, in particular, might know, he is only the eighth chief justice we have had in South Australia since the first one was appointed and, therefore, these are not the sort of events that occur every day, and he certainly has discharged that role with great distinction.

I would like to place on record my sincere wishes that Chief Justice Doyle and his family have a long and enjoyable retirement together. I was speaking with him the other day and I understand that he has, I am not sure, two or three grandchildren about to arrive, which will take the number up to 10, and that, I think, is going to be keeping the Chief Justice fairly busy in what some might call his retirement—although, if he is spending a lot of time with 10 children—

The Hon. J.M. Rankine: The work's about to start.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: —the work's about to start: exactly. I wish the Chief Justice and his family all the very best and would like to express my personal thanks for the great support that he has given to me, the wise counsel he has given to me, and the way in which he has conducted himself in all of his dealings with me during my period as Attorney.

Can I now move on to say a little about the court precinct, because the honourable member for Bragg did mention that. I have to say I was delighted to be able to say a few words about that at the 175^th birthday of the court because I think, number one, that was an auspicious occasion. Nobody turns 175 very often—I do not expect to do it at all—and, for the court to be in that position, I think that was an appropriate time to give some guidance as to what the future might hold for the court.

Secondly, and very importantly, it was a recognition in front of a wide audience at that particular ceremony that the efforts of Chief Justice Doyle in having the government recognise and take steps down the path of his dream of having the courts established in a 21^st century building with 21^st century technology in such a way as to improve their efficiency and service given to the community have begun to unroll. I think it was very important that occurred while he was still the Chief Justice and that was an important recognition of his great contribution.

I think the honourable member for Bragg will find that the amount of money was not $500,000: I think it was $600,000. I can tell the honourable member—as I am sure, in particular, my ministerial colleagues know—that I am quite an enthusiast about this project and, if it was left up to me, there will be no turning back, no backing off, or anything else. Who knows: the Treasurer may even say something about this this afternoon. I do not know. Who can say: it is a budget.

Ms Chapman: You are allowed to: it's your side.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: Am I? Well, I think the money might be in the budget for the study. Either way, it is going to happen.

I now move on to talk about Commissioner Hyde. Can I just say that my ministerial colleague, the Minister for Police and Minister for Emergency Services, will no doubt say a lot more about Commissioner Hyde. I have had many dealings with Commissioner Hyde during my period as Attorney. On every occasion he has been thoroughly professional, he has been courteous, he has been helpful, and I have felt at every turn that I have been able to pick up the phone and have a conversation with him and that he has been a very cooperative person to deal with. He is, obviously, an extremely capable man, and I think the tenure that he has had in that role has been one where the police force in South Australia has never been sullied by some of the muck that has been thrown at other police forces and that is, in no small measure, due to his personal qualities.

The Hon. J.M. Rankine: Integrity.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: Integrity, indeed. I will move on from that but I say: thank you, Commissioner Hyde, and I personally would like to express, again, my best wishes for your retirement for you and your family.

In relation to the director of public prosecutions, I had the opportunity to work with the former director for 18 months, or two years, or so. We had a practical working relationship and a respectful relationship, and I think during his time he did stabilise the office of the DPP, which had been going through a period of uncertainty, perhaps we could say, and I think he did settle down the office and stabilise it, and he did give some public profile to the office of the DPP in his own fashion. I would like to, again, place on the record my thanks for his efforts on behalf of the people of South Australia.

I welcome Adam Kimber to the role. As the member for Bragg has said, he is an outstanding lawyer. He is highly regarded by people in the profession and I think he will have an excellent working relationship with both the legal profession and any government that he may be serving. I think we are going to be very pleased with him and the state will be well served by him. I welcome his appointment and look forward to working with him. In due course, my ministerial colleague, the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, will advise cabinet of a new person in the role of police commissioner.

There is a lot of change going on at the moment. It is a very interesting period: a new Chief Justice, a new police commissioner, a new DPP. We are at one of those points in time which happen almost by accident where all of the major areas in law and justice (and so forth) are turning over at the same time. I think we can all expect to see some changes as a result of that. I know that whoever the new Chief Justice is will bring different skills to the role and whoever the new police commissioner is will bring different skills to the role and, no doubt, a different emphasis. We will have to wait and see. I have not yet been told what is on the mind of the minister, so I do not know, but whoever it is I am sure they will be terrific. Likewise, I am sure the new Director of Public Prosecutions will serve the state well.

I congratulate the member for Bragg for bringing this motion before the house and I am delighted to be able to join with her and my ministerial colleague, the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, in congratulating these three great public servants on their many years of work for South Australia.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE (Wright—Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety, Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (11:51): I am very pleased to speak in support of this motion, recognising the retirement of Chief Justice Doyle and the Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Pallaras. I have met Chief Justice Doyle on a number of occasions and always found him to be a most charming and insightful man. I have not had the opportunity to have any dealings with the Director of Public Prosecutions, but I look forward to working with Adam Kimber in the future.

I rise today to speak most particularly about the retirement of our current Commissioner of Police, Mal Hyde. On 6 March, Mr Hyde announced that he would not be seeking another term as Commissioner of the South Australia Police. When he retires in July, he will have become South Australia's second longest serving police commissioner.

Mr Hyde joined the Victoria Police in 1968 and served in a variety of postings, including detective, district patrol officer and superintendant of a large and diverse inner city division. In 1992, he was appointed to the position of Assistant Commissioner, Corporate Policy, Planning And Review. He supplemented his extensive policing experience with further education and received a Bachelor of Laws, with Honours, and a Master of Business Administration.

He was promoted to Deputy Commissioner in 1993, where he frequently acted in the capacity of Chief Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner (Operations) during critical incidents. As Deputy Commissioner, he had a key role in organisational restructuring, focusing resources to operational policing and overseeing personnel and industrial issues. Mr Hyde was awarded the Australian Police Medal in 1996 and, on 10 February 1997, he assumed his current role as Commissioner of the South Australia Police, following the retirement of Commissioner David Hunt. For many South Australians, these are the only two commissioners they have ever known.

At the time of Commissioner Hyde's appointment, SAPOL was made up of about 3,500 full time sworn officers and 700 civilian staff. At last count, we had 4,500 officers and almost 1,000 support and specialist staff, with recruiting well underway to add another 313 officers. In such an extended period at the head of our police, the commissioner has had the opportunity to craft a vision and put it into practice. This vision was that SAPOL be held in the highest regard as a modern, motivated, progressive and professional organisation, responsive to the community's needs and expectations. The vision is accompanied by a mission of working together to reassure and protect the community from crime and disorder.

SAPOL has made great progress in delivering on these aspirations, and the commissioner has been duly recognised for his work. On 9 June 2008, he was awarded the citation of Officer of the Order of Australia for service to policing and law enforcement as Commissioner of Police in South Australia, particularly through the development of improved service delivery methods, to the detection and prevention of illicit drug use and electronic crime, and through contributions to national law enforcement policies.

As the commissioner prepares to take on new challenges, SAPOL has just opened a new headquarters in the city and the first purpose-built police academy in South Australia's history, something the commissioner described as possibly the most important investment we have ever made in policing. This Labor government supported our South Australia Police with both the resources and the tools to be a first class, effective and modern police force.

Commissioner Hyde leaves a legacy that has a positive impact on South Australians every day. Victim-reported crime has reduced by 37 per cent in the last decade, and the public report very high levels of satisfaction with and trust in our police. The road toll has reduced by a third in the past 15 years, and serious injury crashes dropped to less than 1,000 in 2011 for the first time. Cars are now impounded for serious offences and hoon vehicles can be crushed or sold. Drivers who put others at risk can lose their licence on the spot. From 2007 to 2009, SAPOL worked with other state government agencies and local governments to align their area boundaries and improve services.

The commissioner has overseen a major change in the tools of trade for our police. DNA and electronic fingerprint scanners are now integral to crime fighting. We see dedicated crime scene investigation vehicles on our roads, and cars equipped with advanced digital cameras scan multiple moving vehicles simultaneously to detect stolen, unregistered or wanted vehicles.

Police can test drivers for various drugs in addition to alcohol, and new firearms have been deployed, along with capsicum spray and tasers, the latter of which have been introduced more smoothly than in other states. This undoubtedly reflects a commitment to high-quality planning, training and review mechanisms within SAPOL.

SAPOL has ranked first in seven of the last 10 years in the Australian public's confidence in police. Over that time, we have never finished off the medal podium. South Australia has been ranked first five years in a row for the highest rate of operational police of any state, and I cannot agree more with the Leader of the Opposition's recent statement that South Australia is probably the safest place in the world.

Communication technology has made huge progress since 1997. Email and other digital media now form the backbone of internal police communications, upgraded call centre systems have been implemented, and a new computer-aided dispatch system has recently been rolled out across police and emergency services. SAPOL has also added Facebook and Twitter to its communications portfolio, with more than 40,000 followers now keeping close tabs on the latest community safety news.

Despite the new powers, equipment and buildings, the biggest change you can make is a change to how people think, the way the community see the police and the way the police approach their work. Initiatives such as neighbourhood policing teams, the family safety framework and various diversionary programs now apply non-traditional approaches to solving problems rather than just solving crimes. In the past year, SAPOL has initiated community surveys with those who have come into contact with the police, because one of the best ways to serve the public is to know what they think and what they expect.

During the commissioner's term, women have increased their presence in SAPOL and now account for around one-quarter of all sworn officers and around one-third of overall staff. This increase has been particularly dramatic amongst senior ranks. In 1996-97, there were two female inspectors and one chief inspector. In June 2011, there were 10 female inspectors, four chief inspectors, two superintendents, one chief superintendent and two assistant commissioners. This expanding role of women has been accompanied by a wide range of ages, ethnicities and professional backgrounds amongst those who choose to become police officers.

In addition to contributing to many boards and committees in his role as a public service chief executive, the commissioner also sits on the board of St John Ambulance, CrimTrac and the Australian Crime Commission, and chairs the Australian New Zealand Policing Advisory Authority.

At this point I would also like to pay tribute to Mrs Hyde. Mrs Marcia Hyde has been a constant support to the commissioner over decades of community service and the significance of her contribution should also be recognised. Whether travelling with the commissioner or meeting and supporting countless families and spouses of police, I know she has earned respect within SAPOL and the broader community and is held in the greatest of affection.

I am pleased that the commissioner has indicated that he and Mrs Hyde will be staying in South Australia. I think it says something about them, about our state, that they will continue to call this place home. The people of South Australia and the members of this house owe a debt of gratitude to the commissioner and I thank him for his outstanding service over so many years.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (12:01): I rise to support this motion, firstly speaking in praise of the services of the Chief Justice who, I believe, has not only been a fine judge and a fine Chief Justice but who is also a decent human being. Those roles are not incompatible, or they should not be, but he is a decent human being who has a strong commitment to justice.

I cannot say I have had a lot of dealings with the Chief Justice, but in my limited dealings with him I have found him to be open to discussion. He is not responsible for any failings in the justice system, of course, but he has been prepared to listen and respond to issues I have raised with him. I think that is very important; there are not many places on this earth where people can have access to someone like the Chief Justice. When I met with him two months ago, I think, on the tour to have a look at the facilities, the Chief Justice was located in a very modest office—and that is probably understating the facility he has to work in.

In terms of his public role, his judicial role, he has, I think, been exemplary. I trust in his retirement—and I am sure he will continue to make some contribution to the community—ill-health does not detract from his enjoyment of that retirement.

This does raise the question of when judges should be compelled to retire. I am not sure the current arrangement is necessarily the right one, where there is an age prescription; I think we are moving to a point where people can contribute effectively even though they may have reached the ripe old age of 70 or 72.

However, if you have a system where a judge is able to continue on the basis that they are capable and so on, and you put that onus on the Chief Justice, that puts a pretty unfair burden on the Chief Justice to ascertain whether or not a judge is able to continue in the role. So I think it is an issue, and I am sure the Attorney is well aware of it, this question of when Justices should retire or be compelled to retire. As I said, I note with some concern that the Chief Justice is facing a personal health challenge, and I wish him all the best in the future in that regard.

In relation to the police commissioner, Mal Hyde AO, I have had the pleasure of meeting with him too and I found him to be accessible. Once again, whilst we are often critical of our system as a whole, there are not many places in the world where the police commissioner and, indeed, the Chief Justice as well, make themselves available via radio and other media for participation in the community. I think it reflects highly on our state and our community that we have a situation where people in those senior roles are able to participate in community discussion about their role and responsibilities.

We have a very good police force in South Australia. It is not perfect, but it is one of the best ones that I am aware of. In discussion with the police commissioner some time ago, he said that, ultimately in regard to the quality of the policing, it comes down to the integrity of the individual officer concerned. I had an unfortunate experience with one, and I do not want to go into great detail now, but the behaviour of that particular officer, I think, was not the norm.

I know many fine upstanding police officers. My local superintendents, Tom Rienets and Graeme Adcock, are excellent police officers, fine upstanding members of the police force. Many of my mates have sons in the police force. I will not go into specifics because they are in the criminal investigation area, but I know many police currently serving and those who have recently retired.

It is a difficult occupation to be involved in. In a way, you are set apart from the community. I guess there is a parallel there, too, with justices and magistrates. Whilst they might observe what happens in the community, they cannot really be in the community to the same extent as other people, and I think that is one of the issues that police have to confront in their daily life. They cannot, in a sense, be one of the boys—to use that old expression—or one of the girls, for reasons that people can determine themselves.

The commissioner has in recent times brought about some useful reforms, supported by the minister. We saw one this week in relation to the lowering of speed fines for lower end offending, and I am sure the police had some input into that. I welcome that and the increase in demerit points for offenders. I think that is another good initiative; I have been lobbying in relation to both those issues.

The commissioner has recently issued instructions in relation to procedures by police which I think are good because, for many years, the supervision of traffic enforcement has not been as good as it should be, and I do not think senior officers responsible for traffic enforcement have been as diligent as they should have been in supervising what has gone on in terms of issuing expiation notices and so on.

However, in recent correspondence from the minister and, obviously, coming from the commissioner, he has instructed all officers that they are not to do what happened in my case, where a constable signed an expiation as if he were a more senior officer. One would have thought that was elementary, but that practice was going on, so there was no proper checking of what was going on. To his credit, the commissioner has issued an instruction that that is not to occur in the future unless someone is, for example, out the back of beyond where there is no senior officer available to check the paperwork. That has been a welcome change. The other one relates to expiations; they are going to provide some more detail on them.

I believe the commissioner has been a good model for other police in his behaviour. I think it has been beyond reproach. He has also committed to some sensible reforms in terms of police procedures. I would like to see that go a bit further in terms of a different approach to reviewing expiation notices; it is an issue I have raised before. The other main issue is that the police should be answerable to a police integrity commission as a model, which I think is preferable to the current one where they theoretically answer to the police minister.

In relation to the Director of Public Prosecutions, I have never met with Stephen Pallaras. My observation is that he has been a dedicated law enforcement officer, if you want to use the general terminology. Some people have found him to be contentious in his views. I do not share his view about not allowing people to own firearms. As someone who shoots feral pests frequently on family and other farms, I do not agree with that, but I do agree that there needs to be strict controls on how firearms are used and stored. In all the circumstances I believe he has been a diligent public prosecutor. He has brought credit to that office, so I join in commending these three people—the Chief Justice, the Commissioner for Police and the Director Of Public Prosecutions—thanking them for their service to the state and wishing them all the best in the future.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (12:11): I rise to support the member for Bragg's motion. Although I met Mr Doyle once or twice, I never met Mr Pallaras, but I do think that they have both been extremely good people working for the best interests of the state. The fact is that we have never heard any controversy around Chief Justice Doyle, and that says a fair bit. Unfortunately, Mr Pallaras was ill-named by the former premier as his new Eliot Ness. As the member for Bragg pointed out, he was not a police officer such as Eliot Ness; he had another role to play. From time to time he got unfairly beaten around the ears, and then he was summarily removed at the end of the day. I wish him and Mr Doyle all the best in whatever comes along in the future, and I hope that Mr Doyle's health holds up so that he can get on with what it wants to do for the rest of his life.

I do know Commissioner Hyde and his wife Marcia quite well through my activities in my current role and in my past roles, and they are very good friends of my wife and I. He does enjoy going to the island and going fishing on a regular basis, but he does not catch a lot of fish—that is his big failure. I think Mal Hyde has been a terrific Commissioner of Police in South Australia. There is no question that SAPOL is held in the absolute highest regard amongst police forces in Australia and elsewhere. Clearly, every now and again there is a bit of wayward activity by an officer, and that is dealt with in one way or another.

I find the commissioner an upstanding and very good person. His bearing is always terrific. When he appears at functions his behaviour is terrific. He speaks well, and he notes anybody he has to note in a very good manner. The way that he ran his department made it tick along particularly well. He seems to take his officers with him at all times, from his senior officers right down the ranks. Recently I enjoyed attending the opening of the new academy. I went along as a member of the Public Works Committee; I was on the committee when we approved it. I thought that day said a lot about Mal Hyde. He was very much in control, and they treated him with a great deal of respect on that day. Obviously the minister was there, and it was a day for her as well.

Quite frankly, I find Mal to be one of the best things that has come out of Victoria to South Australia for a fair while, and I will miss him. No doubt we will have a suitable replacement put in place as commissioner. Over the years, in various roles that I have taken in this place—and in veterans' affairs where we had quite a bit to do with their defence force representatives—quite often the police commissioner was there along with his wife, and we all developed a professional friendship and relationship which transcended politics, and I thought everyone acted in the best interests of the state.

Mr Hyde will be missed. He will not be lost to the state, as I understand it, but he will be missed out of the role, but people come and people go. Some go and are forgotten, but I do not think Mr Hyde will be forgotten in a hurry, and I wish he and Marcia all the best for the future. So, with those few words, I support the motion.

Mr HAMILTON-SMITH (Waite) (12:15): I rise to strongly support the motion. I think it is appropriate that the house signal its appreciation for the service of these fine South Australians, Chief Justice John Doyle, police commissioner, Mal Hyde, and the DPP, Stephen Pallaras. They are people who have made a very significant contribution to the legal, justice and policing services of South Australia.

I want to start with Chief Justice John Doyle. I do not intend to repeat his accomplished record of service; other members have done that eloquently. I want to say that as Chief Justice, he has carried with considerable dignity and intellectual rigour, a most important post in this state. I am one who fervently believes in the separation of powers, and who would argue earnestly that it is very important when appointing judges that we do so without political fear or favour; that the judiciary is an organisation to be respected for its independence; and that governments should never fall victim to the temptation to place into chief justice or judicial roles people who are seen to be in any way lined up with one political party or the other. To do so diminishes the judiciary and puts at risk our entire democratic system.

I think this is something that Chief Justice Doyle has understood. I think, particularly in recent years, he has been Chief Justice in difficult times, when the judiciary and the resources available to it have been under challenge, for a range of reasons. I must say that I think from time to time the current government has been unfairly critical of the judiciary. Of course, that makes it very difficult for the judiciary and members of it to respond, because the government must uphold the judiciary in the role of chief justice.

I think the current Attorney has brought a bit of fresh air to the relationship between government and the judiciary in certain respects, and I welcome that, and I am certain that on our side we would seek to continue that. From my observation, Justice Doyle has handled his responsibilities well: he has stood up for the judiciary; he has made his points about resources; he has made his point about the need for there to be independence and distance between government and the legislature and the judiciary; and he has done it without getting into a knuckle fight or a dust-up with the government in difficult times. So, I think that he has done an outstanding job and I wish him well.

I will move on to police commissioner Mal Hyde. I have had a quite a bit to do with the commissioner over the years, both when we were in government and in opposition, in a whole host of ways. I think our police force has managed to keep its nose clean compared to some other police forces around the country and has managed to establish its reputation as being corruption free rather well. In regard to the role of police commissioner, you can be judged in the role not only by what you have achieved but by what has not happened on your watch, and I think in that respect the police commissioner can take some comfort that, on his watch, his force has not endured the sort of scrutiny and the sort of drama that we have seen in Victoria, in New South Wales and, to a lesser extent, in Queensland and in other jurisdictions.

This is a very important thing. I spoke to the police union about this on a number of occasions when I was leader. They have a most important thing to take care of, that is, their reputation as a police service, and any weak link in the chain puts at risk the reputation of all in the service. It is up to the police service itself to enforce that discipline and to maintain that reputation, and I mean not only the association and the union, if you like, the association of police officers, who, I think, are very determined to keep that good reputation of the South Australian force in good order, but it also is up to the police commissioner of the day; and that is something that police commissioner Mal Hyde can hold his head very high about.

Of course there have been a host of challenges. We live in very difficult times for law and order. Drug and alcohol abuse is a real issue. We have had all sorts of problems with crime on the streets: shootings, completely uncivil behaviour by certain elements of the community that has cost lives and caused injury—extraordinary heartbreaking stories to tell. However, I think that you will get very good common sense from police officers when it comes to what is going on in the community.

I remember being in the APY lands a couple of years ago and it was quite apparent to me by the time I left that the people who knew most about what was going on in the APY lands were the police officers, and I think that is generally true in the community as a whole. To Mal and to his wife, Marcia, I just say, 'Well done. Enjoy your retirement.' I am sure there will be things for you to do in the future; I am sure that you will do them well.

I move on to the former DPP Stephen Pallaras, for whom I have to say I have the greatest respect and regard. I noted with interest his arrival in South Australia with the former premier as the Eliot Ness who was going to get the bad guys and lock them up. This was clearly seen as something that the former premier, Mike Rann, and the former attorney, Michael Atkinson, wanted to hang their hat on, and they had got their man. Their man quickly worked out who bad guys were, and I do not think that the former premier and attorney particularly liked what he found. I do not want to stray into that area of the debate in this motion, which has as its prime purpose to recognise their service.

I would say that I believe he was a great choice as DPP, and I think that, properly resourced, we could have done far better things together, that is the parliament, the government and the DPP. If the resources had been given to his office I think that a lot more criminals might now be in gaol and a lot more appeals might have been successfully launched.

I have to say that I think that former DPP Mr Pallaras was one of the most articulate officers that I have heard speaking on the subject of law and order. I believe he did a great job of communicating the role of the DPP to the public, as well as to members of parliament and also to others in the judicial system, and for that he is to be commended, following on as he did from former DPP Rofe.

I wish the new DPP well in the role. He has very, very big shoes to fill. I think that the independence of the DPP was something that Mr Pallaras stood up for and with great moral courage at times in the face of a barrage of criticism from the very people who should have been supporting him. That having been said, you really work out the quality of men when they are under such pressure and, with regard to all these three gentlemen—Chief Justice John Doyle, police commissioner Mal Hyde and the Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Pallaras—can I say that, under that pressure, they shone—they absolutely shone—and South Australia is all the better for it.

It is a good thing that this parliament has taken a few moments this morning to recognise their service. Public servants, generally, come in for a bit of a thrashing, as do politicians. I think it is good that from time to time we stop, reflect and consider the good work that they do and pay thanks to them. I think each of these three men has made South Australia a better place and made a difference and, after all, isn't that why we are all here?

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg) (12:25): I simply thank the members for their contributions. As the member for Waite has said, it is important that we be generous in allocating time to recognise those who have served us so diligently, competently and with such commitment. I thank members for joining me in this motion of support. I certainly have not heard one murmur of dissent, so I would like the motion to be put forthwith and look forward to the house's support.

Motion carried.