<!--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="4.0" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML">
  <name>Legislative Council</name>
  <date date="2024-03-21T14:15:00+10:30" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fifth 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="5187" />
  <endPage num="5235" />
  <dateModified time="2024-03-22T15:25:21+10:30" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Workplace Death Compensation</name>
      <text id="20240321de1c25522a564a2ca0000142">
        <heading>Workplace Death Compensation</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="5418" referenceid="e7b583be01404e74b438589370882e1d" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. C. BONAROS</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2024-03-21T03:45:00+10:30">
            <name>Workplace Death Compensation</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2024-03-21T14:51:20+10:30" />
        <text id="20240321de1c25522a564a2ca0000143">
          <timeStamp time="2024-03-21T14:51:20+10:30" />
          <by role="member" id="5418" referenceid="e7b583be01404e74b438589370882e1d">The Hon. C. BONAROS (14:51):</by>  Supplementary: does the Attorney accept that the current definitions of dependents that apply in the Return to Work scheme do not necessarily fit modern day families when it comes to that reliance that he speaks on, and that legal dependence may have a very different meaning to the modern day family structure and dependence that may result?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4697" referenceid="c1607c57d2294390bdc2b07c15f35010" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. K.J. MAHER</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Aboriginal Affairs</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Attorney-General</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2024-03-21T03:45:00+10:30">
            <name>Workplace Death Compensation</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2024-03-21T14:51:50+10:30" />
        <text id="20240321de1c25522a564a2ca0000144">
          <timeStamp time="2024-03-21T14:51:50+10:30" />
          <by role="member" id="4697" referenceid="c1607c57d2294390bdc2b07c15f35010">The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector) (14:51):</by>  I thank the honourable member for her question. Again, I will need to check but, if I am recalling correctly, the scheme contemplates those, such as a spouse and others, who are dependent on a person like an underage child, but I think the scheme contemplates other people who are dependent upon the person's income.</text>
        <text id="20240321de1c25522a564a2ca0000145">So I think the scheme already contemplates that there may be other forms of people who are dependent who don't meet what might have been a definition of very strictly a spouse or a child, that might have been a definition that was more widely used in decades gone by. But if that's not the case, I will bring back a reply.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>