<!--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="4.0" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2025-02-05T10:30:00+10:30" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>55</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="10721" />
  <endPage num="10797" />
  <dateModified time="2025-02-07T13:48:10+10:30" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>South Australia Police</name>
      <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000429">
        <heading>South Australia Police</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4335" referenceid="bddaaedd686f4f0cb1696bd6aa212f78" kind="question">
        <name>Mr ODENWALDER</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Elizabeth</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2025-02-05T00:00:00+10:30">
            <name>South Australia Police</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2025-02-05T14:18:43+10:30" />
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000430">
          <timeStamp time="2025-02-05T14:18:43+10:30" />
          <by role="member" id="4335" referenceid="bddaaedd686f4f0cb1696bd6aa212f78">Mr ODENWALDER (Elizabeth) (14:18):</by>  My question is to the Minister for Police. Can the Minister for Police update the house on how the Malinauskas government is investing in our police force to get more police on the beat and is he aware of any commentary on this approach?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" referenceid="78a22826e43d4639bdfa63b5f3ef73f9" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Lee</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Treasurer</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Defence and Space Industries</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Police</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2025-02-05T00:00:00+10:30">
            <name>South Australia Police</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2025-02-05T14:18:58+10:30" />
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000431">
          <timeStamp time="2025-02-05T14:18:58+10:30" />
          <by role="member" id="4842" referenceid="78a22826e43d4639bdfa63b5f3ef73f9">The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Treasurer, Minister for Defence and Space Industries, Minister for Police) (14:18):</by>  I thank the member for Elizabeth for his question—a former sworn police officer that we are fortunate to have in the state's parliament.</text>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000432">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" referenceid="78a22826e43d4639bdfa63b5f3ef73f9" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Lee</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Treasurer</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Defence and Space Industries</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Police</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000433">
          <by role="member" id="4842" referenceid="78a22826e43d4639bdfa63b5f3ef73f9">The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN:</by>  Apparently, the fact of me highlighting a member of parliament is a former sworn police officer is an incentive for those opposite to interject. How indicative of that is their approach to policing here in South Australia. It is regarded by them as a political opportunity rather than a solemn responsibility to community safety—just outrageous.</text>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000434">Today we saw the police commissioner make a significant announcement about boosting frontline policing here in South Australia in both metropolitan areas and also in regional South Australia. He has done that on the basis that this government has substantially stepped up resourcing to South Australia Police since we have been in government.</text>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000435">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" referenceid="78a22826e43d4639bdfa63b5f3ef73f9" uid="d8149f18451d4c2c996fd693ef6c7f97" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Lee</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Treasurer</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Defence and Space Industries</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Police</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000436">
          <by role="member" id="4842" referenceid="78a22826e43d4639bdfa63b5f3ef73f9" uid="d8149f18451d4c2c996fd693ef6c7f97">The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN:</by>  The fledgling shadow minister, he himself only recently parachuted into this place, says, 'How's that going?' Well, if you see 70 extra frontline police deployed by the police commissioner today, I think it is going pretty well. I think that is something worth celebrating. If you see 20 more officers dedicated to Operation Measure to combat retail theft in retail shops and bottle shops, I think that is pretty good. If you see a brand-new dedicated task force formed by the police commissioner to tackle youth and street crime, I think that is pretty good.</text>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000437">The reason why is because beyond those two areas we see more resources being dedicated to domestic violence investigations, more resources being dedicated towards regional policing, and more resourcing dedicated towards cyber and financial crimes—all good things.</text>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000438">Like pretty much every other politician on the Liberal and Labor sides of politics, I support the decisions of the police commissioner of the day—unlike the member for Bragg, the first politician from a major party in the last generation to directly criticise a decision of the police commissioner. What does he say? He said on FIVEaa this morning, 'This is smoke and mirrors'—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="6982" referenceid="3d5cb79b4d454cc980b2842cae5afaaa" uid="80569379d25a477d9a7763660a45f630">
        <name>Mr BATTY</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Bragg</electorate>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000439">
          <by role="member" id="6982" referenceid="3d5cb79b4d454cc980b2842cae5afaaa" uid="80569379d25a477d9a7763660a45f630">Mr BATTY:</by>  Point of order: the minister is debating under 98 at best and he is reflecting on me at worst. He is obsessed with me; he should start obsessing over fixing—</text>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000440">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000441">
          <by role="office">The SPEAKER:</by>  Can I have members on both sides silent? Member for Bragg, I have been observing you during the minister's answer and you have done nothing but provoke and interject. I remind you that interjections are unparliamentary and in breach of the standing orders. If you are going to poke the bear, if the bear decides to give you a little hug back, I am going to let him go for a little bit.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4842" referenceid="78a22826e43d4639bdfa63b5f3ef73f9" uid="5ad1d2ace41a4e67b1519008e35ddff7" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Lee</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Treasurer</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Defence and Space Industries</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Police</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <page num="10750" />
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000442">
          <by role="member" id="4842" referenceid="78a22826e43d4639bdfa63b5f3ef73f9" uid="5ad1d2ace41a4e67b1519008e35ddff7">The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN:</by>  On FIVEaa the member for Bragg says, 'This is smoke and mirrors from Stephen Mullighan'—not the police commissioner; he gets his facts wrong already. He says, 'He's shut down two existing task forces tackling youth crime and replaced it with one and given it a new name. There is no boost to police on the frontline.'</text>
        <text id="202502051a2a247885654024a0000443">What did the police commissioner himself say barely an hour later? He said, 'By creating a task force the function remains the same, but we now have permanently dedicated people undertaking those duties and it means that we no longer have to drag people out of patrol cars to fulfil that function, so it puts more police on the frontline.' Then the member for Bragg went on and said, 'In fact, we have 10 per cent less police today than we did five years ago.' This is blatantly wrong, because today there are 4,537 active full-time sworn staff and at the end of their term they had 4,534—fractionally less. Wrong again. Get your facts right, you amateur.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>