Data Harvesting

Mr MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Leader of the Opposition) (14:50): My question is to the Premier. Has the Premier had any conversations with the Chief Executive Officer of the Department of the Premier and Cabinet regarding the Ombudsman's inquiries into the misuse of data?

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL (Dunstan—Premier) (14:50): I am just trying to determine when this issue was raised first which chief executive it was. Obviously, this was a matter of much interest in the public domain and so there quite possibly were conversations. The reality is that we have now had a report by the Privacy Committee into the matters raised—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: —of the allegations made by those opposite and, I must say, also people within the media. So we now have a Privacy Committee report with findings. We know that that was going to the Ombudsman, because guess what? That was actually included in the report which was tabled. So I am not quite sure why this was such an incredible revelation. The revelation—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Kaurna will cease interjecting.

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: The fantasy world going on opposite is quite extraordinary, and I am quite sure the media won't fall for it.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: We have had lots of cry wolf type allegations from those opposite before. Let's not forget the allegations—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier will resume his seat just for one moment. I have indicated now a number of times to the house that the minister, in answering the question, is entitled to be heard in silence. If a member considers that the minister is not answering the question, or is not otherwise complying with standing orders, a member is entitled to raise a point of order in the usual way. There is no occasion for sustained interjection by way of commentary or otherwise. That conduct is disorderly, on my right or my left, and it will cease. The Premier has the call.

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: So the question, just for everybody's refresher, was really about whether or not I had had any discussions with the chief executive of the Department of the Premier and Cabinet with regard to any Ombudsman's inquiry into this matter. The answer to that is no.

I did inform the house that there were probably conversations, and I am not sure whether it was with this chief executive or the previous chief executive because it was a matter of great public interest, because there were some very serious allegations raised by those opposite and others. They were investigated. There was a report which was published. It did mention that it would be going to the Ombudsman, so it's no great revelation that of course the Ombudsman has had a look at it. What is of great interest quite frankly today is that the Ombudsman says 'no findings'. In fact, he has been very clear about this matter.

Mr Malinauskas: He's referred it to the OPI.

The SPEAKER: Order, the leader!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: As to why the Ombudsman referred it to the OPI is a matter for the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman, as most members of this parliament would know, has very limited jurisdiction. So there may be issues raised within the Privacy Committee's report that was made available that are well beyond his scope. That would be something for the Ombudsman to make comment on, not me. He appeared before the Crime and Public Integrity Policy Committee.

Those opposite are asserting there is some inquiry underway. Well, there is no evidence of that whatsoever. The Ombudsman has clarified this, probably in response to some of the inane claims made by those opposite. So he has actually put out a clarifying statement which makes it very clear it is being sent there for assessment—no inquiry—by the OPI. But he also goes further because—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: —he did make a comment this morning that there had been findings and he made, I think, a very quick response to that being reported but, no, in fact there were no findings whatsoever by the Ombudsman.