<!--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="2017-11-29" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>53</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="12345" />
  <endPage num="12439" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Riverbank Precinct</name>
      <text id="2017112940416bef5a6c41aba0000588">
        <heading>Riverbank Precinct</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="1804" kind="question">
        <name>Ms CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Bragg</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Deputy Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2017-11-29">
            <name>Riverbank Precinct</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2017-11-29T14:30:29" />
        <text id="2017112940416bef5a6c41aba0000589">
          <timeStamp time="2017-11-29T14:30:29" />
          <by role="member" id="1804">Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:30):</by>  Supplementary: of the meetings of which the criticism has been raised and acknowledged by the minister, were there no records made, or were records made and conveyed to cabinet and therefore are no longer in the agency, or is there any other explanation?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Lee</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Transport and Infrastructure</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Housing and Urban Development</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2017-11-29">
            <name>Riverbank Precinct</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2017-11-29T14:30:48" />
        <page num="12378" />
        <text id="2017112940416bef5a6c41aba0000590">
          <timeStamp time="2017-11-29T14:30:48" />
          <by role="member" id="4842">The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (14:30):</by>  Well, it's a good question because the Auditor-General does, I think, attempt to examine that particular delineation between what documents were able to be provided. I think that what the Auditor-General does say is that, in terms of the capacity of government, i.e. ministers in cabinet, to make decisions, there was analysis and there was information that was able to be provided to form the basis of those decisions that were taken at those various junctures at different points in time.</text>
        <text id="2017112940416bef5a6c41aba0000591">However, that's quite separate, I think, from what the deputy leader is getting at, and that is whether sufficient records were kept, particularly of that meeting she mentioned earlier in her questioning between the former chief executive of the infrastructure agency and Walker Corporation. Given that the description by the Auditor-General of the lack of those records and the documentation that was able to be provided to him, it seems, at least from reading, that those documents were unable to be provided, at least, or potentially uncovered at all.</text>
        <text id="2017112940416bef5a6c41aba0000592">I think the concern that informs a lot of the recommendations of the Auditor-General about this particular process is that those sorts of meetings between public servants and Walker Corporation were insufficiently documented for the basis of appropriate record keeping in the public sector, let alone for any subsequent overview by somebody like the Auditor-General.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>