<!--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="2014-07-24" />
  <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="1203" />
  <endPage num="1310" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Child Protection</name>
      <text id="2014072447dd6cca56ee46b3a0000379">
        <heading>Child Protection</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4338" kind="question">
        <name>Mr MARSHALL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Dunstan</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-07-24">
            <name>Child Protection</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-07-24T14:41:35" />
        <text id="2014072447dd6cca56ee46b3a0000380">
          <timeStamp time="2014-07-24T14:41:35" />
          <by role="member" id="4338">Mr MARSHALL (Dunstan—Leader of the Opposition) (14:41):</by>  Yes, sir. Will the government now reconsider the recommendation of former chief justice Brian Martin regarding the removal of automatic suppression orders for sexual offences?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1810" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.R. RAU</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Enfield</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Deputy Premier</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Attorney-General</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Justice Reform</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Planning</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Housing and Urban Development</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Industrial Relations</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-07-24">
            <name>Child Protection</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-07-24T14:41:50" />
        <text id="2014072447dd6cca56ee46b3a0000381">
          <timeStamp time="2014-07-24T14:41:50" />
          <by role="member" id="1810">The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing and Urban Development, Minister for Industrial Relations) (14:41):</by>  This is a matter which we debated in this house 18 months or two years ago; it was a matter of some considerable discussion there. What was arrived at was an amendment to the then existing section 71A of the Evidence Act. The previous position, Mr Speaker, as you would be able to recall, was that those orders were mandatory and could not be changed. The parliament said, 'Look, we accept that there may be circumstances, in the public interest, when that mandatory maintenance of a suppression order is not in the public interest and should be varied, and a judge should be able to make that variation.' We amended the law to enable that to happen, and that is where it should be.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>