ROBINSON, MR S.A.

The Hon. R.D. LAWSON (15:17): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a further question of the minister representing the Attorney-General regarding the matter of Shane Andrew Robinson.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.D. LAWSON: As the Hon. Mr Brokenshire mentioned, last week Shane Andrew Robinson, a parolee whose parole was revoked on 22 June this year, committed a series of serious criminal acts that injured a police officer and terrified a number of citizens before killing himself. Robinson should not have been at large because his parole had been revoked on 22 June. The Attorney-General initially, and later the Minister for Correctional Services, sought to defect public criticism of the government in relation to this matter by suggesting that personnel on the Parole Board ought to be changed. The Attorney-General told ABC Radio yesterday morning:

The first thing I have to do is work out who was on the Parole Board when this very bad decision was taken.

In fact, the presiding member of the board, who made the decision to release Robinson on parole, was Mr Tim Bourne, who was appointed to the Parole Board by this government in November 2004. He is a lawyer in private practice and has close connections with the Australian Labor Party. Before his appointment the Attorney-General divulged that Mr Bourne had acted for the Attorney-General in his personal capacity in the celebrated defamation action between Ralph Clarke and the Attorney. In November 2004, at the time of the appointment—

The Hon. R.I. Lucas: Pro bono.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I remind the honourable member that it is not a second reading speech.

The Hon. R.D. LAWSON: No, indeed. In November 2004, at the time of the appointment, the Hon. Angus Redford asked the then minister for correctional services what qualification Mr Bourne had for the appointment, but the minister declined to provide any details. My questions to the Attorney are:

1. What point was the Attorney-General endeavouring to make when he said, and I quote again, 'The first thing I have to do is work out who was on the Parole Board when this very bad decision was taken'?

2. Why is that the first thing that the Attorney-General had to do in relation to this matter?

3. Does Mr Bourne still enjoy the confidence of the government?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:20): It is my understanding that the Parole Board is the responsibility of the Minister for Correctional Services. Of course, that is the appropriate place for it to be.

The Hon. S.G. Wade: Well, then, why is Atkinson talking about it?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Because the Attorney-General is responsible for law and order generally and the judicial system, and there is obviously some interaction between what happens on parole and sentencing. Obviously, the Attorney-General has responsibility for legislation in relation to the operation of the various judicial and semi-judicial or pseudo-judicial bodies within our community—that is his responsibility—but the actual responsibility for the Parole Board lies with the Minister for Correctional Services because, of course, essentially the Parole Board is dealing with people who are administered through the corrections system.

In relation to the comments made by the Attorney, he is responsible for those and I will see whether he wishes to make a contribution to the answer.