House of Assembly Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Matter of Privilege Matter of Privilege Deputy Premier Deputy Premier Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Bragg Deputy Leader of the Opposition Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (11:01): Mr Speaker, I raise a matter of privilege. I rise on this matter of privilege as I believe that a member of this house has knowingly and deliberately misled this house and abused the privileges of this house. On 13 October 2015, the Attorney-General, in question time, in respect of the Gillman option deed with ACP, made the following statements: Now, what ACP ultimately choose to do with that land, at the time of the settlement, is a matter between them and the people who they are negotiating commercially with. He went on to say: They will then deal with the commercial aspects of that with whomever they are dealing, so that's a matter for them. And then further: As I have said repeatedly in this place, the fact of the matter is that, whilst there was an expectation by ACP that there would be an opportunity for the creation of an oil and gas hub, it has been said many times here, by me and by the former minister, that, obviously, that is a commercial matter over which the government ultimately does not have control. And finally: That's a matter which ACP will deal with in its own commercial fashion, in its own good time. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Member for Bragg, obviously the Attorney-General did not recite the word 'comma'. Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Ms CHAPMAN: I appreciate that, thank you, sir, for that advice. I conducted a search of statements of other ministers of the Crown, in particular the Treasurer. When he was the minister for housing and urban development on 25 February 2014 stated publicly: The agreement with ACP includes a series of performance targets focused on employment and economic development, with a target specifically requiring part of the land to be developed into a resources hub to support the state's fast expanding oil and gas industry. A copy of Hansard, pages 2864 to 2867, and details of the statements are provided to you, Mr Speaker. In view of the above, I ask that you rule that there is a prima facie case of breach of privilege. I believe that the truth of the matter can only be determined by the establishment of a privileges committee; further, that the Attorney-General be interviewed by you and the privileges committee; and that the Treasurer be at liberty to answer to you and the committee. Further, that the Attorney make available to you and the committee a copy of the final signed option deed in question. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: What proceeding of the house does the deputy leader say has been, for want of a better word, perverted? Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Ms CHAPMAN: The suggestion here in respect of the privilege of the house is that the ministers make statements to the house obviously that are accurate, and there is the aspect of whether the government and/or a minister or a member of the parliament indeed misleads the house. I have not elected to proceed with a motion of misleading. I have sought to exercise the role in respect of the privilege. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: I will look at the papers and I will rule later in the day after giving it consideration in accordance with the precedents that bind us on this. It is as well to say that it is quite common for members to claim a breach of privilege. I am not saying this is the situation with the member for Bragg, but to claim a breach of privilege for misleading and then, when the Speaker rules that there is not a prima facie case to bring on an immediate motion for a privileges committee, for the member to then forget all about it and the issue disappears. I would hope the member for Bragg would have the courage of her convictions and if she did not get a favourable ruling on the timing of the motion, unlike other members, she would go ahead with the motion. If it is sufficiently serious to raise as a matter of privilege and to seek a prima facie ruling from the Speaker and accelerated debate, it is worth, I would have thought, debate. Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Ms CHAPMAN: Thank you for your indication, Mr Speaker. Can I assure the house that, upon the information being presented to the house, during the course of last week from the investigations I indicated that I had ascertained the inconsistencies (if I put them as high as that), and of course have brought the matter to your attention as soon as practical after the commencement of the resumption of parliament today. So, I wish to firstly assure you that that has been as expeditious as it could since the identification and, secondly, that of course we are in your hands as to your ruling. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Of course, and I wish to assure myself that the point is not evanescent.