<!--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="2019-06-06" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>54</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="3627" />
  <endPage num="3673" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Scissor Lifts</name>
      <text id="201906060bacbd054670495180000185">
        <heading>Scissor Lifts</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="5419" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. F. PANGALLO</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2019-06-06">
            <name>Scissor Lifts</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2019-06-06T15:09:39" />
        <text id="201906060bacbd054670495180000186">
          <timeStamp time="2019-06-06T15:09:39" />
          <by role="member" id="5419">The Hon. F. PANGALLO (15:09):</by>  Supplementary: can I just say that the Treasurer's swipe at the Coroner and his office is really quite disingenuous. Are you saying that you are dismissing not only these findings but other findings that are made by the Coroner in serious matters that affect workplace safety and other matters, and will you accept responsibility if there is another incident?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="605" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. R.I. LUCAS</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2019-06-06">
            <name>Scissor Lifts</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2019-06-06T15:10:13" />
        <text id="201906060bacbd054670495180000187">
          <timeStamp time="2019-06-06T15:10:13" />
          <by role="member" id="605">The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (15:10):</by>  I certainly don't interpret anything I have said as a swipe at the current Coroner. What I have said is that as minister I don't just automatically accept even a well-informed opinion from a coroner as being something that I as minister and the government of the day automatically have to accept and implement. Governments are elected to govern, coroners are elected to give opinions in relation to the particular cases they investigate.</text>
        <text id="201906060bacbd054670495180000188">The former Labor government, when royal commissions have made recommendations, on occasions have not implemented all the recommendations of a royal commission. Equally well-informed royal commissions, I am sure, but ultimately Labor governments—as have former Liberal governments—have to make judgements in relation to the informed advice they get from royal commissioners or coroners—or indeed court decisions for that matter—and then make their judgement.</text>
        <text id="201906060bacbd054670495180000189">They need to be judged and we need to be judged accordingly by the people of the state. I have no problems with that. I don't interpret that as a swipe at the Coroner at all. That's the characterisation that the Hon. Mr Pangallo has used. I interpret it as just a sensible operation of government in relation to just not automatically accepting every view that a royal commissioner, for example, gives us, or indeed a coroner does.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>