<!--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="2011-07-07" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>52</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="3391" />
  <endPage num="3444" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding>
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000012">
      <heading>Question Time</heading>
    </text>
    <subject>
      <name>Burnside Council</name>
      <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000013">
        <heading>BURNSIDE COUNCIL</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="1820" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Leader of the Opposition</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2011-07-07">
            <name>BURNSIDE COUNCIL</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2011-07-07T14:21:00" />
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000014">
          <timeStamp time="2011-07-07T14:21:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1820">The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (14:21):</by>  I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for State/Local Government Relations a question relating to the Burnside Council.</text>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000015">Leave granted.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1820" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000016">
          <by role="member" id="1820">The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY:</by>  Yesterday, the minister stated:</text>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000017">
          <inserted>I would like to make clear that all allegations of corruption have been referred to the South Australia Police Anti-Corruption Branch, even prior to this investigation. I am advised that there has never been evidence presented to the Anti-Corruption Branch that warranted further investigation.</inserted>
        </text>
        <text continued="true" id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000018">My questions to the minister are:</text>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000019">1.&amp;#x9;Is it not the case that Mr MacPherson's draft report included a range of draft findings, including that charges be laid against a number of persons, and that those draft findings have not been considered and rejected by the Anti-Corruption Branch?</text>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000020">2.&amp;#x9;Will the minister confirm that all evidence, records and documents collected during the investigation were referred to the police, or were allegations simply referred for independent follow-up by the police?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3125" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <electorate id="">Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for State/Local Government Relations</electorate>
        <startTime time="2011-07-07T14:22:00" />
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000021">
          <timeStamp time="2011-07-07T14:22:00" />
          <by role="member" id="3125">The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY (Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for State/Local Government Relations) (14:22):</by>  First, I must say that I have not read the report; there is a suppression order. If the member has read the report he has done that illegally, so I would keep quiet if I were him. I have not read the report, and my advice—</text>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000022">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="62">The Hon. S.G. Wade interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3125" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000023">
          <by role="member" id="3125">The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY:</by>  Would you stop spitting over the chamber if you do not mind? I am trying to talk. My advice is that all allegations, as petty as they are or were, were referred—</text>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000024">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="62">The Hon. S.G. Wade interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3125" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000025">
          <by role="member" id="3125">The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY:</by>  Listen Charlie; I'll tell you something. Something I have that you will never have is that I have actually been on local government and I know how petty a lot of these accusations can be. I am speaking from experience.</text>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000026">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="52">The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3125" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000027">
          <by role="member" id="3125">The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY:</by>  I do not know what is in the report; you obviously do: you have obviously read it against the suppression order. As Leader of the Opposition you should be ashamed of yourself, totally ashamed of yourself. With regard to all the evidence and documents, or whatever, I am seeking advice on a continual basis as to how to wind this up—</text>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000028">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="52">The Hon. D.W. Ridgway interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3125" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="2011070722c5deb67b6047b990000029">
          <by role="member" id="3125">The Hon. R.P. WORTLEY:</by>  If I was someone who had just admitted to reading a report that is the subject of a suppression order, I would sit back and look sheepish, as you should do.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>