Matter of Privilege

Residential Care Facility Visits

The SPEAKER (17:57): I advise the house that I rise in response to the matter of privilege regarding the Minister for Child Protection. I make the following statement with regard to the matter of privilege raised by the member for Kaurna in this house earlier today; however, before addressing that matter, I wish to outline the significance of privilege as it relates to the house and its members.

As we have heard before, privilege is not a device by which members or any other person can seek to pursue matters that can be addressed by a debate or settled by the vote of the house on a substantive motion. McGee in Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand in my view makes the best test for whether or not a matter is a matter of privilege by defining it as a matter that can 'genuinely be regarded as tending to impede obstruct the House in the discharge of its duties'.

Generally speaking, any act or omission that obstructs or impedes the house in the performance of its functions, or that obstructs or impedes any member or officer of such house in the discharge of his duty, or that has a tendency, directly or indirectly, to produce such a result, may be treated as a contempt and therefore be considered a matter of privilege even though there is no precedent for the offence.

I refer to the matter raised by the member for Kaurna in relation to an answer given by the Minister for Child Protection to a question in the house earlier today, more specifically, in response to the question asked by the member for Badcoe at 2.28pm:

Has the minister's office played any role in formulating and distributing the statement issued by her chief executive a short time ago?

The minister replies by saying no. The member for Kaurna advised the house that he had been advised that her staff were seen distributing the chief executive's statement at the minister's press conference shortly before question time. The member for Kaurna alleges that the Minister for Child Protection has misled the house as her answer to a question allegedly contradicts information brought to the attention of the member, namely:

…her staff were seen distributing the chief executive's statement at the minister's press conference shortly before question time.

I refer to an earlier question asked by the member for Badcoe to the Minister for Child Protection at 2.18pm:

My question is to the Minister for Child Protection. Has the minister or anyone in her office played any role in formulating the statement issued by her chief executive a short time ago?

The minister answered by saying:

I have no involvement in what my CE puts out. She is an individual and can say whatever she likes, and she stands by me in that statement that you should have read by now.

In my opinion, what is at issue is the disparity between the minister's answer and information brought to the attention of the member for Kaurna concerning the distribution of the statement. I have subsequently had the benefit of hearing the Minister for Child Protection's personal explanation and, while the minister has acknowledged an involvement of her staff in the distribution of the statement, she was not aware of it at the time.

The minister has further affirmed that the minister's office played no part in formulating the statement.

Part of my role in considering this matter is also to consider the relative seriousness of the matter that has been raised. In essence, the conduct complained of must be genuinely regarded as tending to impede or obstruct the house in the discharge of its duties in order for the conduct to raise a question of privilege.

Therefore, in the Chair's opinion, this is not a matter of privilege for the reasons I stated above. In the Chair's opinion, the matter could not genuinely be regarded as tending to impede or obstruct the house in the discharge of its duties. Therefore, I also decline to give the matter the precedence that would allow the member for Kaurna to immediately pursue the matter; however, of course, my opinion does not prevent any member from pursuing the matter by way of substantive motion.

At 18:00 the house adjourned until Tuesday 4 September 2018 at 11:00.