Legislative Council Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1) 54 1 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Shop Trading Hours Shop Trading Hours The Hon. F. PANGALLO Legislative Council Shop Trading Hours The Hon. F. PANGALLO (14:40): Will the Treasurer give an assurance that he will not use his discretion for a trial of deregulated hours outside the holiday periods and special periods? The Hon. R.I. LUCAS Legislative Council Treasurer Shop Trading Hours The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (14:40): I can't give the member the assurance along the lines he has given for the reasons I have outlined—that is, when Mr Roger Drake or his equivalent comes to me and asks for something which is completely out of the blue, to say, 'I would like to have extended trading hours for one of my stores for this particular reason,' I will consider Mr Drake's submissions to me on merit. I can't give a blanket assurance because I don't know when Mr Drake or Mr Romeo or one of the IGAs or Foodlands might come to me and ask for extended trading hours in particular circumstances. But if the import of the member's question is, 'Would I seek to subvert the whole rationale underlying of the Shop Trading Hours Act through the use of exemptions?', then clearly I wouldn't use the power that way, because that would be inconsistent with the shop trading legislation. The shop trading hours legislation makes it quite clear that, whilst ministers do have this power to exempt, and they are quite extensive, it cannot be used by ministers—I don't have the exact words—essentially to undermine the whole rationale and purpose of the legislation. Indeed, one of the great ironies of this particular power is that a former minister, Graham Ingerson, who is now one of the lobbyists opposing shop trading legislation on behalf of Mr Drake and the IGAs and the Foodlands, back in the late nineties used this particular power to try to provide for extended Sunday trading, I think, throughout all of the city areas at the time. That was eventually fought by the union bosses in the shoppies union and it was eventually defeated in the High Court because it did undermine the rationale for the legislation. Former minister Ingerson's use of it was way too broad and too expansive. My use of it is very similar to the use that minister Rau has used it for in the past—that is, it is specific, to a purpose and it is judged on a case-by-case merit basis. You have my assurance I will continue to make those sorts of judgements on a case-by-case and merit-based basis.