Grievance Debate

CHILD PROTECTION

Mr PISONI (Unley) (15:04): What a day of 'don't knows' by this government. It could not be described in a more clear way than the heading of the press release that I have in my hand: 'Rankine continues Weatherill's Labor legacy of child protection bungling.' Here we have a situation where the fourth education minister in less than four years (the member for Wright) has added to the litany of Labor government child protection bungles, emulating her predecessor (the member for Hartley) and, of course, the Premier himself, by getting critical details wrong on the floor of the parliament. Minister Rankine was asked about indecent assault charges.

The SPEAKER: Member for Unley, would you be seated, please. I will not have the surnames or Christian names of members used. It is explicitly contrary to our standing orders. You have been cautioned before. You are on two warnings. If you do it again, you will be required to leave.

Mr PISONI: Could you please clarify whether the reading of press releases, for example, or other media items into the Hansard—

The SPEAKER: You can read your own press release—that is fine—but, if you, in the course of doing so, use a member's Christian name or surname, you will be out of order.

Mr PISONI: So, are you ruling then that, when members use any media—

The SPEAKER: No, when you read out your own news release.

Mr PISONI: That is the ruling?

The SPEAKER: Yes.

Mr PISONI: The Minister for Education (the member for Wright) was asked about new indecent assault charges filed yesterday against another school care worker at the western suburbs school that is at the centre of the Debelle inquiry. I asked the question of the minister whether she could advise the house if she was made aware of the new indecent assault charges filed yesterday. The member for Wright's answer to the parliament was:

I can tell the member for Unley that my understanding is that this is about the first victim that was identified by the police, and the police do not regularly advise me about charges that they are laying.

We asked the police minister if they could clarify whether that was the case today and, of course, he did not know. Then the Attorney-General (the member for Enfield) thought he would save the day and gave the same answer as well, that he did not know because he was only acting in the position as the education minister.

The facts are that there are two new victims and five in total of this hideous creature, who is at the centre of the Debelle inquiry. It is just unfathomable that another minister, in addition to the Premier, could address this parliament and then, again, get the details wrong. Remember the Premier, of course, told the house that his office was not informed of the rape of the eight year old when he was the education minister.

Then, of course, the member for Hartley told this house that parents were not informed about the rape of the eight year old. Even after the conviction of this man and the naming of this man in local media, parents could not be told because that was police advice but, of course, she had to come into the house and explain that she got that wrong because the police had put out a press release—

The Hon. C.C. Fox interjecting:

The SPEAKER: I call the Minister for Transport Services to order.

Mr PISONI: —debunking the claims made by the member for Hartley (the education minister at the time) saying that they actually advised that the minister should consult with the Department for Education to formulate a method of advising the school community of what had occurred. Even more importantly, Gary Burns (the police commissioner) came out and said that, by not telling parents, it may very well have hindered the investigations into the paedophile. It was another unimaginable bungle by the then minister (the member for Hartley) when she told the parliament that a mother of a—

The Hon. C.C. Fox interjecting:

The SPEAKER: I warn the Minister for Transport Services for the first time.

Mr PISONI: In another incident, a mother of a rape victim in a school was advised that she was not getting any support from the department and, when the minister said that the department was meeting with her right now, she was, in fact, sitting in the gallery and was not aware of any meeting that had been planned for her. These are embarrassing gaffes that have continued under the current education minister. Just to make it clear to the house, and those who don't read Hansard every day, last night the minister came into the chamber and she said:

Today the member for Unley asked me when I was made aware of the new charges laid against the out of school hours care worker who had previously been found guilty of offences against a child and is currently imprisoned for these offences.

She made a total balls-up of the answer and then came back and said:

The DPP tonight advised me that today's court proceedings involved new charges being laid that were not related to that first victim.

That is how she clarified her situation—waiting until everybody had gone home, all the media had gone home, the last news service had completed and the news rooms were closed, and snuck in and made this correction simply to manage her own situation.

The SPEAKER: Before we go any further, I would explain to the member for Unley, regarding my earlier ruling, that the prohibition of standing orders and the long-term usage of parliaments in the English speaking world that one not refer to members or ministers by their Christian name, or their surname, or their nickname, could easily be defeated by the member drafting a press release using the minister's Christian name, surname, or even a nickname, and then reading the press release and saying one was merely quoting.

I also notice that the member for Unley referred to the timing of the minister coming into the house to make a statement. I think there was a point of order taken earlier by the opposition that it was out of order for the government to comment on the timing of the Leader of the Opposition coming in here to make a retraction explanation and personal explanation. I think we can treat it as in order now that members can refer to the timing of members making personal explanations or retractions.

Mr PISONI: You seem to be very thorough, sir, when the debate is about the education minister.

The SPEAKER: Thank you very much for that, member for Unley. The member for Mitchell.