Matter of Privilege

Matter of Privilege

The SPEAKER (14:09): Before I call questions without notice, I wish to address a matter of privilege. I refer to the precedent established by Speaker Peterson and Speaker Gunn. As you are aware, recently a political party, the Liberal Party, contacted many residents of the Adelaide Hills. The contact was made, as I understand it, without consent and by telephone.

Some residents are concerned that their telephone numbers and other confidential, constituent-only information may have been unlawfully accessed because they only shared phone numbers and other confidential information with me so that I could render assistance, including support following the Cudlee Creek bushfire. The parliament needs to be put on inquiry, in my judgement, as to whether confidential, electorate-only records have been accessed in breach of parliamentary privilege.

Members will know that I gave the Address in Reply to the Governor detailing the harrowing and confronting experience of constituents during and after the Cudlee Creek fire. Many people contacted me so that in part I could inform parliament about the circumstances facing Hills' communities in the aftermath of that fire. It would strike a blow at the very heart of our democracy if those most confidential and private records and contact details, shared in some cases on an urgent basis for the provision of emergency support, were later accessed and used for an unrelated political purpose either by a political party or by a company, Parakeelia Pty Ltd, acting for, in connection with or for a political party.

If it is the case that confidential and intimate records, shared at a time of great distress, have been used in this way it may be a serious scandal and give rise to real questions about the lawfulness and appropriateness of access and use of those records, as well as amounting to a potential and serious breach of parliamentary privilege. I encourage members of the South Australian community, including in the Hills, who have information that might relate to this matter to approach the house. I ask members to bring forward any documents and materials as may be relevant to a prima facie case of privilege.

It would only be for me to form a view, if necessary information is brought forward, about whether those matters meet the prima facie threshold. It would not be for me to form a view about any matter that would be considered by a committee if a committee was in fact formed. The committee would be independent, act independently and have a chair independent to me reporting after its own separate deliberations to the house.

In any event, I refer to the precedents that have earlier been established, and they are important. As well, it cannot be the case that information known to me cannot be ventilated simply because it relates to, in part, parts of my electorate, other parts of the Hills or indeed people who are residing in the Hills, or who have moved or otherwise would not have redress unless it were the case that the Speaker, knowing these matters, could raise them.

In context, an important context, I bring the following matter to the attention of the house. This may become relevant evidence. This is a communication from a member of the South Australian community:

I confirm that I have never provided my details to the Liberal Party. However, I was recently contacted by the Liberal Party by phone to conduct a push poll about you—

The reference is to me—

I have never given my permission for the Liberal Party to contact me directly by phone or in any other way. I found the phone call to be intrusive as it tried to misrepresent my thoughts in the manner in which it asked questions and the way it gave limited viewpoints for responses.

I was in touch with you during the course of the Cudlee Creek bushfire emergency and response and at that time I provided you with my contact and other personal details. I have always found my dealings with you to be of a compassionate, helpful and responsive nature.

It goes on:

I ask that this matter be investigated and would like the Liberal Party to offer a copy of their privacy policy.

The complainant was a volunteer coordinator for an outreach group set up to provide life-sustaining support during and after that bushfire. I also provide this information to the house, another communication:

I confirm that I have never provided my details to the Liberal Party, however…

And it goes on:

I was recently contacted by the Liberal Party.

There is an indication that that contact was by phone. There is also an indication that it was 'to conduct a push poll about you'. The email goes on to say that this particular person was in contact with me during the course of the Cudlee Creek bushfire emergency and response. It also goes on to say that contact information and other personal details were provided to me. It says: 'I ask that this matter be investigated.'

The complainant is a captain of a CFS brigade. As I have earlier indicated, I ask that information be brought forward. My only role will be to form a view about whether the threshold, a prima facie threshold, is met. Thereafter, it will be a matter for the house.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: Point of clarification, Mr Speaker. May I inquire as to the status of the statement that you have made?

The SPEAKER: Yes.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: It is an invitation to bring forward information in relation to the subject matter that you have made on the basis that you will consider the information that you have already identified, and any other submissions, for the purpose of consideration of whether there is a prima facie case for privileges. If that is so, will you be tabling the three documents from which you have quoted?

The SPEAKER: I will not be tabling the information because it would identify, potentially, those people. However, I have shared that information with the house because it is important and because the complainants have indicated that they wish for the matter to be investigated. I have also shared it on the basis that that information is known to me and therefore it seems to me that it must be brought before the house and it also seems to me that without me bringing it before the house it might never be resolved.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN: A further point of clarification, Mr Speaker: is it the intention then of the Speaker that, except for the name and address or identifying address details (email, for example) of the authors of those documents, the Speaker will be tabling the material, the whole of the material?

The SPEAKER: No. The information that might be brought forward would be considered by me but, as I say, I am not going to identify people unless they wish to be identified as complainants. Of course, additional information might well be supplied to the house and I anticipate that it will be.