HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-09-08 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION

Mrs REDMOND (Heysen—Leader of the Opposition) (16:01): Will the Premier rule out announcing for the next state election a policy for establishing a state independent commission against corruption?

The Hon. M.D. RANN (Ramsay—Premier, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Social Inclusion, Minister for the Arts, Minister for Sustainability and Climate Change) (16:01): I cannot rule out your announcement that you are going to be introducing a private member's bill, which one of your Liberals was already talking about before. Apparently it is being revived or revegetated or something.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: Resuscitated.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: Resuscitated, that's right. We have completely different priorities on law and order. I want to talk about some of the things that we have heard, including that you would not overrule the Parole Board if it made a decision to release Bevan Spencer von Einem. You said this:

Well, it would depend on the circumstances. If von Einem was 87 years old and was no threat—

The SPEAKER: Order! The Premier will take his seat.

Mr GRIFFITHS: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, I ask you to make a judgment on the matter of relevance. The question was quite specific and the Premier is talking about many other issues.

The SPEAKER: Give the Premier an opportunity to explain the relevance of what he is saying.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: If members opposite do not think that the release of Bevan Spencer von Einem is relevant to their credibility as a future alternative government then they are on a different planet, because—

Mr WILLIAMS: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, the Premier has had an opportunity to explain the relevance and I think he has failed miserably, as he always does.

The SPEAKER: Order! The member for MacKillop's opinion has no bearing in this place. The Premier, though, must not engage in debate.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: I am not; I am trying to be helpful. I am trying to be helpful to members opposite who would be extremely hesitant to move against a recommendation of the Parole Board on the issue of von Einem or McBride. In terms of this issue of corruption, the great corruption of our children is the selling of drugs. The Leader of the Opposition goes to a rave party with Sandra Kanck—

Mr VENNING: I again raise a point of order on relevance, and the Premier is now defying the chair.

The SPEAKER: I do not think the Premier is defying the chair, but I will listen carefully to what he has to say and I will pull him up if I think he is.

The Hon. M.D. RANN: It is quite clear that the Leader of the Opposition cannot handle the truth of her own previous commitments on law and order. On the issue of ecstasy, following attending a rave party with Sandra Kanck, she said, 'I mean certainly the information is that ecstasy doesn't seem to be as big a risk as a number of other drugs.' Not a risk! Tell that to the parents of kids who have died as a result of an ecstasy overdose.

The SPEAKER: Order! I think the Premier is now straying from the topic and engaging in debate.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

Mr WILLIAMS: Sir, I now seek a point of clarification.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, the Attorney-General!

Mr WILLIAMS: I did not discern any difference in the Premier's response to the question between the time when you suggested that he was not defying the standing order regarding relevance and your ruling now when you suggested that the Premier is defying the standing order regarding relevance. I seek your clarification on why you made that ruling.

The SPEAKER: It is a fair question. The chair has to give a member an opportunity to make their point before determining whether they are engaging in debate or whether the member is answering the substance of the question. In answering a question, a minister may be making points that at the outset may not appear to be answering the substance of the question. I, like previous occupants of the chair, have always allowed a minister a certain opportunity in answering the question to frame it as the minister sees fit.

Likewise, in the course of debate on bills I could point to any number of instances where members have ranged very widely in debate and the practice of the chair has always been to give members a fair degree of tolerance in ranging over a number of issues before the chair pulls the member up. So, my answer to the question is that I did not rule either way with regard to whether the Premier's answer was relevant or was answering the substance of the question. I was simply providing the Premier with an opportunity to make his point and demonstrate relevance. I do, however, concede that the Premier was engaging in debate and that is why I intervened when I did.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT