<!--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="2021-02-16" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>54</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="73" />
  <endPage num="4343" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>COVID-19 Contact Tracing</name>
      <text id="2021021671cf0b3ec98840c980000536">
        <heading>COVID-19 Contact Tracing</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="543" kind="question">
        <name>Ms BEDFORD</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Florey</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2021-02-16">
            <name>COVID-19 Contact Tracing</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2021-02-16T14:47:00" />
        <text id="2021021671cf0b3ec98840c980000537">
          <timeStamp time="2021-02-16T14:47:00" />
          <by role="member" id="543">Ms BEDFORD (Florey) (14:47):</by>  My question is to the Attorney-General. Is photographing handwritten COVID check-in data considered misuse, and which part of the act covers this behaviour? With your leave, sir, and that of the house, I will explain.</text>
        <text id="2021021671cf0b3ec98840c980000538">Leave granted.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="543" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>Ms BEDFORD</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2021021671cf0b3ec98840c980000539">
          <by role="member" id="543">Ms BEDFORD:</by>  I have been informed police commissioner Grant Stevens has said today that it will now be an offence under the emergency act to misuse handwritten COVID check-in data. I ask the Attorney: does this mean it wasn't an offence when I asked this question last week?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1804" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Bragg</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Deputy Premier</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Attorney-General</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Planning and Local Government</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <startTime time="2021-02-16T14:47:35" />
        <text id="2021021671cf0b3ec98840c980000540">
          <timeStamp time="2021-02-16T14:47:35" />
          <by role="member" id="1804">The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Planning and Local Government) (14:47):</by>  Firstly, I thank the member for the question. I indicated to the member that in relation to the taking of a photograph, in relation to her QR question last sitting week, the publication of that material may be an offence. But you made the inquiry, and I undertook to go away and find some further information. The information I did find was that no-one has been, on the information I have been provided, prosecuted in relation to disclosure relating to QR offences, which we had also canvassed in the last week of sitting.</text>
        <text id="2021021671cf0b3ec98840c980000541">Yes, I am aware of the statement made by the police commissioner as to whether he thinks the taking of a photograph or other evidence of the handwritten documents that people fill in on entering a property ought to have some sanction as an offence. Obviously, I will consider that. I am still waiting on him, actually, in relation to a drive dangerous proposal that he announced on radio a couple of weeks ago. I understand the gist of what he would like to have in that regard, but I am still waiting for that.</text>
        <text id="2021021671cf0b3ec98840c980000542">To date, it seems that his agency has not referred any matter for prosecution in relation to any breach of the QR codes. I am not aware, as I indicated on the last occasion you raised the question in the parliament, whether anybody has been dealt with for taking a photograph. But as I indicated, I thought it was important that if the member had information about someone who has been found to be doing that or is undertaking that practice, they should refer the matter to the police for the very reason that, if any information from that photograph is used or published, that may be a breach and that would be a matter for the police to take up.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>