<!--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="2022-05-04" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fifth Parliament Parliament, First Session (55-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>55</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="25" />
  <endPage num="66" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Ombudsman Investigation, Member for Bragg</name>
      <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000265">
        <heading>Ombudsman Investigation, Member for Bragg</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="3126" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2022-05-04">
            <name>Ombudsman Investigation, Member for Bragg</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2022-05-04T15:17:35" />
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000266">
          <timeStamp time="2022-05-04T15:17:35" />
          <by role="member" id="3126">The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD (15:17):</by>  I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a question of the Attorney-General regarding the editorial in <term>The Advertiser </term>today.</text>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000267">Leave granted.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3126" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000268">
          <by role="member" id="3126">The Hon. D.G.E. HOOD:</by>  In <term>The Advertiser </term>today I am sure members would have seen and read with some surprise or some interest at least that the editorial was quite scathing of the previous government and their role in the inquiry into Ms Chapman late last year.</text>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000269">I would like to add a few quotes from <term>The Advertiser </term>editorial this morning, and I quote directly, 'The parliamentary probe into Ms Chapman was indeed stacked against her.' Next quote, 'It was a partisan inquiry.' Next quote, 'It was politically loaded.' Next quote, 'Dan Cregan and his Labor friends from the Premier down tried to humiliate Ms Chapman.' The next quote, 'The whole thing is a worrying episode.' Next quote, 'We saw with the Chapman affair Mr Malinauskas and his team were open to the most brutal political games.' Finally, it concluded, 'They were all badly wrong.'</text>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000270">My question to the Attorney-General is: does he accept the account of the editor of <term>The Advertiser</term> in today's editorial and if not, why not?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4697" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. K.J. MAHER</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Attorney-General</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Aboriginal Affairs</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <startTime time="2022-05-04T15:18:52" />
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000271">
          <timeStamp time="2022-05-04T15:18:52" />
          <by role="member" id="4697">The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Attorney-General, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector) (15:18):</by>  I thank the honourable member for his question. I haven't read today's editorial. I will do so at some stage. I am not in a position to give great commentary on what was said without having yet read it.</text>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000272">I will check the <term>Hansard</term> record but I think the honourable member referred to the actions of the previous government, which would be the Liberal government. I am not sure if he wants me to reflect on the actions of the previous Liberal government. I am not sure that's what he meant.</text>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000273">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4697" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. K.J. MAHER</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000274">
          <by role="member" id="4697">The Hon. K.J. MAHER:</by>  If that's what he said. We can all check the <term>Hansard </term>to see if the honourable member wanted me to reflect—</text>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000275">
          <event kind="interjection">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker kind="speech" role="office">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000276">
          <by role="office">The PRESIDENT:</by>  Order!</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4697" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. K.J. MAHER</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000277">
          <by role="member" id="4697">The Hon. K.J. MAHER:</by>  —on the previous Liberal government or not, because I am quite happy to reflect on the previous Liberal government, if that's what he wishes. Putting that aside, it may have been just a slip, if that's what the honourable member said.</text>
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000278">I will note that the committee that looked at this didn't have a majority of Labor members on that committee. It was a committee that had a minority of Labor members on this committee. In fact, other members of the committee were Liberal members and former Liberal members.</text>
        <page num="41" />
        <text id="202205045a2e3bddee6248f0a0000279">It was a minority of Labor members. The majority of the committee were Liberal members and former Liberal members, so it wasn't something that was a Labor-dominated committee, it was actually dominated by Liberal and former Liberal members.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>