<!--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="2014-05-22" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Third Parliament, First Session (53-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>53</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="351" />
  <endPage num="429" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Ministerial Staff</name>
      <text id="20140522c5e32f055c74467180000643">
        <heading>Ministerial Staff</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4343" kind="question">
        <name>Mr GARDNER</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Morialta</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-05-22">
            <name>Ministerial Staff</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-05-22T14:53:38" />
        <text id="20140522c5e32f055c74467180000644">
          <timeStamp time="2014-05-22T14:53:38" />
          <by role="member" id="4343">Mr GARDNER (Morialta) (14:53):</by>  If the accusation suggested does not, as the Premier indicates, have any basis, why indeed did he give the staff member a first and final warning?</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>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-05-22">
            <name>Ministerial Staff</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-05-22T14:53:55" />
        <text id="20140522c5e32f055c74467180000645">
          <timeStamp time="2014-05-22T14:53:55" />
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier) (14:53):</by>  If those opposite would listen closely to what I say: the elements of the recitation of the conduct were not in all respects matters that were matters of fact; not to say there wasn't a basis for a finding of misconduct and, therefore, a proper basis for a warning. It demonstrates the peril of people coming in here and making assertions on the basis of things they simply do not understand. This matter was taken incredibly seriously, and my bias in relation to these matters is that I have zero tolerance for them, but I am obliged to undertake—</text>
        <text id="20140522c5e32f055c74467180000646">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20140522c5e32f055c74467180000647">
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL:</by>  Yes, it is. I am obliged to undertake a proper process and understand the true nature of the facts and weigh up all of the matters before I take a particular course of action. Now, the individual in question is under no illusion about the seriousness with which this matter is taken. There won't be any tolerance of anything that is in this nature.</text>
        <text id="20140522c5e32f055c74467180000648">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="1813">Ms Redmond interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20140522c5e32f055c74467180000649">
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL:</by>  Well, those opposite think they know the facts in relation to this matter. It is for people to carry out conscientious investigations, to actually understand the context, to actually see whether there is indeed contrition and to actually understand what the other person (who was the subject of the conduct) thinks about the matter. All of those matters were properly taken into account and a proper disciplinary outcome was undertaken. It is simply wrong to come in here and suggest otherwise.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>