<!--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="2013-09-12" />
  <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="6877" />
  <endPage num="6959" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Child Protection</name>
      <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000471">
        <heading>CHILD PROTECTION</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="3124" kind="question">
        <name>Mr PISONI</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Unley</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2013-09-12">
            <name>CHILD PROTECTION</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2013-09-12T14:44:00" />
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000472">
          <timeStamp time="2013-09-12T14:44:00" />
          <by role="member" id="3124">Mr PISONI (Unley) (14:44):</by>  My question is to the Premier. Did Kate Baldock advise the Premier or her minister, the member for Hartley, when she became aware in February 2012 of the rape conviction of the western suburbs out of school hours care worker at the centre of the Debelle inquiry?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Cheltenham</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Premier</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for State Development</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for the Public Sector</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for the Arts</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2013-09-12">
            <name>CHILD PROTECTION</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2013-09-12T14:44:00" />
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000473">
          <timeStamp time="2013-09-12T14:44:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier, Treasurer, Minister for State Development, Minister for the Public Sector, Minister for the Arts) (14:44):</by>  I want to address what has been going on in this house, in both houses, over the last few days. No-one ever before has come into this place or the other place and questioned the findings of a royal commissioner—never. It just hasn't happened. There is a reason that it hasn't happened—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3124">
        <name>Mr PISONI</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000474">
          <by role="member" id="3124">Mr PISONI:</by>  Point of order, sir. The question was not about the royal commission. The question was about Kate Baldock advising the Premier or her minister, the member for Hartley.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000475">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> Yes, I will listen to what the Premier has to say and see if he will join up his remarks to your question.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000476">
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL:</by>  Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I will in due course. We have a Leader of the Opposition who was content to say that this select committee that has been established in the other place was about matters arising peripheral—things that needed to be dealt with outside of the royal commission. He was happy with the royal commission. He thought that was a good bit of work, yet he permits a senior shadow minister of his to go into the other place and make the most outrageous allegations under parliamentary privilege, which directly contradict the findings of a royal commissioner.</text>
        <page num="6912" />
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000477">There is a good reason why we refer matters to a royal commissioner: because they are beyond reproach. They are beyond reproach, and when you question the findings of a royal commission, what you are questioning are the findings of a former Supreme Court judge, who is a long-standing QC and a long-standing Supreme Court judge, and should not have his competence questioned. He engaged in an extensive exercise that canvassed in the most extreme detail: 239 days, 8,000 pages of evidence, $1 million worth of expenditure and 328 pages of report. Anyone who has read that report—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000478">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  Point of order.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000479">
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL:</by>  —would have seen—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000480">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> Point of order from the member for Bragg.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000481">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  It is a very long, circuitous route joining the dots between what was started here and what the question was. The question was about—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000482">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> Yes, I know what the question was and I think—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000483">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  It has nothing to do with the Debelle inquiry.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000484">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> —the Premier is about to tilt towards it. Premier.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000485">
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL:</by>  Thank you, Mr Speaker. No-one before—the Leader of the Opposition has admitted this, and he should be here to actually account for this. The Leader of the Opposition—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000486">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  This is not a question about the Debelle inquiry. This is a question about a specific—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000487">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> Would the deputy leader and the Premier both be seated. It is not a good practice to reflect on votes in another place. It is not a good practice to reflect on the presence or absence of members of the chamber. We are all here at all times in the view of the house. I now ask the Premier to address the question that was asked.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000488">
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL:</by>  Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will address the question, because it goes fundamentally to the question of the findings of the royal commissioner. The reason that we send matters to the royal commission is so that people can have public confidence in the institutions of government. It is the rarest thing that a politician, for some short-term political advantage, puts that above those important public institutions.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000489">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  Now the Premier is suggesting that there—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000490">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> Is there a point of order?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000491">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  Well, are you listening to my point of order?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000492">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> I am listening to it. I am waiting for a point of order.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000493">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  Standing order 127.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000494">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> Which is?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000495">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  Imputing improper motive.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000496">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> I don't think—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000497">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  It is a direct allegation against the Leader of the Opposition's purpose in raising questions. That is—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000498">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> No, I think—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000499">
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN:</by>  —reflecting on the questioner, who is not even asking the question.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20130912971e57f2aec54650b0000500">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> Well, I don't think that standing order has been breached. There may be others, but not that one. Premier—the Premier is finished. The member for Unley.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>