<!--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="2013-03-20" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>52</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="4837" />
  <endPage num="4914" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding>
    <name>Parliamentary Procedure</name>
    <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000515">
      <heading>Parliamentary Procedure</heading>
    </text>
    <subject>
      <name>Public Works Committee Witnesses</name>
      <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000516">
        <heading>PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE WITNESSES</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="531" kind="speech">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <startTime time="2013-03-20T14:52:00" />
        <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000517">
          <timeStamp time="2013-03-20T14:52:00" />
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER (14:52):</by>  In response to the member for Waite's earlier point of order, I have this advice from the secretariat of the Public Works Committee. It states:</text>
        <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000518">
          <inserted>Rod Hook was neither 'summonsed' nor indeed 'summoned' to appear before the PWC. As is regular practice, DPTI, as the agency appearing before the Committee, upon notifying the Committee they would be bringing a project as per the Parliamentary Committees Act provided a list of witnesses who would appear at the hearing.</inserted>
        </text>
        <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000519">
          <inserted>The Committee's User Guide to Agencies outlines the process that applied here:</inserted>
        </text>
        <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000520">
          <inserted>'The committee has power to summon witnesses, compel them to attend and to produce relevant documents. This power is rarely used. Usually the Committee invites persons or organisations to provide relevant documents and make written or oral submissions.'</inserted>
        </text>
        <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000521">
          <inserted>Prior to the meeting Mr Hook's office notified me, as Committee Executive Officer, that Mr Hook would not be able to appear as he had another meeting he was obliged to attend; in his absence another of the listed witnesses, an Executive Director directly involved in the proposed project, would be leading the presentation.</inserted>
        </text>
        <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000522">
          <inserted>It was also suggested Mr Hook may arrive late if his other obligation ended early enough. (In the end, this did not happen).</inserted>
        </text>
        <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000523">
          <inserted>Another witness attended who was at Project Director level.</inserted>
        </text>
        <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000524">
          <inserted>Both witnesses were competent to provide information on the project.</inserted>
        </text>
        <text id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000525">
          <inserted>Consulting the Minutes and Hansard, Mr Hook's absence was described as 'disappointing' and it was asserted that the presence of Department CEOs was desirable at PWC meetings, but it was not specifically raised as a possible contempt of the Committee.</inserted>
        </text>
        <text continued="true" id="201303208f3506f0e0d347dab0000526">I would add to that, as a matter of procedure, a report from the committee would be required to initiate action for contempt, and we do not have such a report.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>