<!--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>Legislative Council</name>
  <date date="2009-07-15" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>51</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>3</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="2845" />
  <endPage num="2927" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Legislative Council Reform</name>
      <text id="20090715515c100a08534bdbb0000201">
        <heading>LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REFORM</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="3130" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. M. PARNELL</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2009-07-15">
            <name>LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REFORM</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2009-07-15T15:23:00" />
        <text id="20090715515c100a08534bdbb0000202">
          <timeStamp time="2009-07-15T15:23:00" />
          <by role="member" id="3130">The Hon. M. PARNELL (15:23):</by>  I have a supplementary question. Given the minister's support for the Tasmanian reforms, why did the government not introduce multi-member electorates in the lower house in South Australia?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="574" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2009-07-15">
            <name>LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL REFORM</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2009-07-15T15:23:00" />
        <text id="20090715515c100a08534bdbb0000203">
          <timeStamp time="2009-07-15T15:23:00" />
          <by role="member" id="574">The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:23):</by>  As I have just said, Tasmania has a different system. It has single-member electorates in the upper house and multi-member electorates in the lower house. That is the Tasmanian system. We have a tradition within the Westminster system, which applies in every other part of the British commonwealth, other than perhaps Tasmania, where we have the single-member electorate composition. That has been the tradition of our system. The government is formed by the party or group, as the case might be, that wins the maximum number of seats in the lower house. That is our tradition, and this government certainly does not propose to move away from that system, which has been a part of our government ever since self-government in 1857 and, indeed, for much longer in the United Kingdom on which our parliament has been based. In fact, while I am using the example of the UK parliament, that parliament has reformed its upper house in significant ways to reduce its powers—</text>
        <text id="20090715515c100a08534bdbb0000204">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="62">The Hon. S.G. Wade interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="574" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="20090715515c100a08534bdbb0000205">
          <by role="member" id="574">The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY:</by>  Well, yes; but it has also reduced its powers to block legislation, which has made that house much more accountable. So, I think the direction the government is proposing is very much in line with the reform in western countries. When the Hon. Nick Xenophon was here, I understood that he was a supporter of four year terms. It will be interesting to see what his views are and whether he still holds that view.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>