<!--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="2021-10-14" />
  <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="7856" />
  <endPage num="8216" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Liberal Party Candidates</name>
      <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000576">
        <heading>Liberal Party Candidates</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="5084" kind="question">
        <name>Mr MALINAUSKAS</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Croydon</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2021-10-14">
            <name>Liberal Party Candidates</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2021-10-14T14:52:33" />
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000577">
          <timeStamp time="2021-10-14T14:52:33" />
          <by role="member" id="5084">Mr MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Leader of the Opposition) (14:52):</by>  Does the Premier believe that South Australians are entitled to know whether the Premier is okay with members facing criminal charges being candidates at the next election?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4342">
        <name>The Hon. D.C. VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000578">
          <by role="member" id="4342">The Hon. D.C. VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN:</by>  Point of order, sir: exactly the same response as the Attorney-General just made. The question is completely out of order.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000579">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  Minister, I have given consideration to the question. It invites a wider answer in relation to all members, and I would be open to receiving submissions as to whether, nevertheless, the matter might traverse sub judice matters, and so I will hear you out on that point. Leader, I will hear out the Leader of Government Business first and then I will turn to you.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4342">
        <name>The Hon. D.C. VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000580">
          <by role="member" id="4342">The Hon. D.C. VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN:</by>  In that case, in response to your comments, it is a hypothetical question.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000581">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  Leader, do you wish to address me on that point?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="5084" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>Mr MALINAUSKAS</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000582">
          <by role="member" id="5084">Mr MALINAUSKAS:</by>  I make no reference to any specific matter. I am simply seeking—</text>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000583">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000584">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  The first question was out of order. Members, we are now considering the second question as to why the leader's question ought be put and is not beyond the standing orders.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="5084" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>Mr MALINAUSKAS</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000585">
          <by role="member" id="5084">Mr MALINAUSKAS:</by>  My question is simply asking the Premier if he is okay with having people charged with criminal offences being Liberal Party candidates. It goes to whether or not the Premier thinks it is ethical to have people facing criminal charges as members of the Liberal Party standing as candidates at the next election. It's a basic question of standards that the Premier should be held to account on.</text>
        <page num="8164" />
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000586">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000587">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  Members, I will draw the house to order. That was—</text>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000588">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="4339">Mr Whetstone interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000589">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  Member for Chaffey, you are warned. Leader, the initial question appeared to be directed at any member. It didn't specifically mention—or rather the subsequent question is reformulated, which—</text>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000590">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000591">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  Order!</text>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000592">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000593">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  Order! Member for Chaffey, you are warned. Please don't respond to interjections. We are going to resolve this matter before the house. The second formulation appeared to be a much wider formulation. I foreshadow that I might be inclined to accept that question if it were put again, but the answer that the Premier or Attorney or any other minister might give may be well informed by the sub judice rule.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="5084" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>Mr MALINAUSKAS</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000594">
          <by role="member" id="5084">Mr MALINAUSKAS:</by>  Do you want me to re-ask the question?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000595">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  I understand that there was a second formulation, which is why it didn't relate to any specific matter and it didn't relate to any specific member and it didn't seek to impugn or—</text>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000596">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000597">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  Order! The leader.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="5084" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>Mr MALINAUSKAS</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000598">
          <by role="member" id="5084">Mr MALINAUSKAS:</by>  My question is to the Premier. Does the Premier believe that South Australians are entitled to know whether the Premier is comfortable with having members of his Liberal Party team as candidates for the next state election facing criminal charges?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000599">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  The Leader of Government Business.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4342">
        <name>The Hon. D.C. VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000600">
          <by role="member" id="4342">The Hon. D.C. VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN:</by>  Again, Mr Speaker, it is a completely hypothetical question for which the Premier is not responsible to the house.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000601">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  I am going to allow the question. As I say, refer to the sub judice rule and that may well inform the answer.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4338" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Dunstan</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Premier</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <startTime time="2021-10-14T14:55:47" />
        <text id="20211014066e944c6a524b51a0000602">
          <timeStamp time="2021-10-14T14:55:47" />
          <by role="member" id="4338">The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL (Dunstan—Premier) (14:55):</by>  I have nothing to add to my previous answers.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>