HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, First Session (53-1)
2014-12-04 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Land Rights (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill

Committee Stage

In committee (resumed on motion).

Clause 1.

Ms CHAPMAN: I am almost finished on this. I am sure that the leader has some very important questions on this question of what happens next, if the bill is passed. I think what you have said is that the minister has not decided yet who is going to be appointed. There will be a process and consultation about who should be appointed before that decision is made. Is it the intention of the minister that the opposition will be consulted in respect of the appointment of a new administrator?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I am unable to bind my colleague minister. I think it is a reasonable request to make, and I will convey that to him, but I want to just be very clear that the minister has not said that he will move immediately to appoint an administrator. It is very important that he be allowed to have due consideration, having the power to do so.

Ms CHAPMAN: Is it intended then that there is going to be some advertising for a position, if he does decide on the information that is so pressing that we have to pass this legislation? I am getting an inconsistent message, minister. We are being asked to rush this through the parliament so that it gives him a chance in the next three months to take steps, including the appointment of an administrator, and now you are saying to us that he has not really decided that he is necessarily going to do that. What is the situation here? What is he actually going to be doing?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I think it is important to note that having the power to do something changes the dynamic regardless, but he has indicated that he will take this under consideration as soon as he has the power and work through a process in an appropriate way. Whether the opposition is part of that consultation, I cannot bind him, as I say, but I am prepared to convey that I think that is a reasonable proposition.

Mr MARSHALL: Just on this same topic, has the government had discussions with any person or persons regarding taking up this role?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: Not to the knowledge of the people advising me here.

Mr MARSHALL: There has been some confusion in the other place as to whether or not the Commissioner for Aboriginal Engagement has been consulted. Could you clarify whether the commissioner has been consulted regarding this amendment bill?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: The advisers here are unaware if that consultation has occurred. I think the minister may have said that it had not in the other place, but I have not read Hansard sufficiently clearly to be confident of that. Our knowledge is limited, and we would have to take that under advice.

Mr MARSHALL: Can the minister provide any explanation as to why the Commissioner for Aboriginal Engagement would not be consulted? Is there any situation in which it would be appropriate not to consult with the commissioner expressly commissioned to engage on Aboriginal affairs in South Australia?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: That is a position that you have put. Because I do not have the advice on whether or not that has occurred, it is difficult for me to answer that question.

Mr MARSHALL: I would suggest we need to clarify this because there have been serious allegations made in the other place today as to whether or not the minister has consulted with the Commissioner for Aboriginal Engagement. I am happy for you to send one of your advisers to ask the minister so that we can get this clarified, because we will not be passing this until we get an answer.

The CHAIR: Are you indicating that you are not sending a messenger?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: No; I have advisers here and they are unable to advise me, so I do not have an answer. I can take it on notice for you, and I think we should just proceed with the committee stage.

Mr MARSHALL: I am happy to continue with other questions, but I advise that we will not be passing this unless we get an answer to this important question. We would like to know whether or not there was engagement. We do not want these wishy-washy answers that continue to be presented to us with the government's hopeless mismanagement of this bill before the house. They need to treat the house with respect.

We have given our best undertaking to work with the government but, to date, we have had no straight answer. There have been very serious allegations today in the other place regarding this matter and we would like it determined. I suggest that we get an answer as soon as possible. I will proceed with another question on the same clause. Can the minister advise whether the meeting held between minister Hunter and members of the APY Executive on 21 November was the last meeting that was held with the APY?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: Yes.

Mr MARSHALL: Can the minister confirm that at this meeting he informed the APY Executive that he would choose the next APY general manager and that he wanted the APY Executive to agree with him?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I would have to take that on notice. I am not the minister, clearly, so I would have to take it on notice to ask him to provide you with information about that.

Mr MARSHALL: Can you advise, minister, who accompanied the minister at this meeting?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I understand these questions were asked in the other place and therefore the answers ought to be a matter of record or being obtained for you. I am unable to answer for myself.

The CHAIR: Shall I put clause 1, which is just the title?

Mr MARSHALL: No.

The CHAIR: You do not even want the title?

Ms CHAPMAN: It is just that there are only three or four clauses on this issue, and then there are the ICAC issues.

The CHAIR: Leader.

Mr MARSHALL: Is the minister seriously suggesting to this committee that she is not going to tell us who accompanied the minister to the meeting with the APY Executive on 21 November?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: Given that that question has been asked in the other place of the person who attended, then I think that should be sufficient.

Mr MARSHALL: Sorry, but we do not all sit around reading Hansard from the other place on a continuous basis. We are asked to consider this matter here today as presented and we are doing that. We would like to know who attended that meeting with the minister.

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I have taken that on notice.

Dr McFETRIDGE: On that same clause, on page 7 in his draft report to Mr George Kenmore, the conciliator reported that, when Mr McCarthy raised issues about financial management and compliance with the act, he had not seen a report that was done by a Mr O'Shea into compliance with the act. I said yesterday in the house that I actually have a copy of that report and in that report there are 110 line items. Some 52 line items—47 per cent—were in compliance, 46 per cent were noncompliant and 12 per cent were opportunities for improvement, so for over 50 per cent of the particular items that were examined by this auditor, the APY were actually in breach of the act. Has the minister seen this report and, if not, why not?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: Can I just clarify whether you mean me as minister or the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs?

Dr McFETRIDGE: Can you say that again?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: You just asked if the minister had seen something and I was checking whether you meant me or the minister in the other place.

Dr McFETRIDGE: The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, obviously.

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: My adviser is unable to say whether the minister has seen either report. We are a little unclear about whether you are asking about the Niemann or the O'Shea, but she is unclear whether the minister has seen either. I am unable to speak to that.

Mr MARSHALL: Chair, I have checked Hansard from the debate, which was held in the other place on Tuesday evening. The question was asked, but it is not clear who attended that meeting, so we do not have any clarity. I ask the minister again: who attended that meeting and was Nerida Saunders at that meeting?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I have taken that on notice.

Ms CHAPMAN: In respect of the meeting on 24 November 2014, which the minister attended with the APY Executive, is it correct that the minister said that he was going to draft legislation to change the APY structure and that he would introduce it next year?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I can ask the minister what he said at that executive meeting, but I do not have that knowledge.

Clause passed.

Clauses 2 to 4 passed.

Clause 5.

Ms CHAPMAN: Under the act, permits are required for anyone who wishes to go on the lands. It is all consistent with the original legislation obviously to give some autonomy and the right to enter. Given that there are not fences all the way around this—it is not like a small property—it needs to be respected so that people do not enter without permission. That is done by a permit system. Certain persons are exempt; one example is members of parliament, with an accompanying person), and police are on that list. This amendment proposes that it also applies to the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption, an examiner, or an investigator performing a function of ICAC.

We have heard already from the minister that there are matters that may be referred to ICAC arising in some way out of events on the lands; I do not need to go into the detail. The ICAC commissioner has indicated that, if he is to attend, this clause is necessary for the purposes of undertaking his inspection, interviews, confiscation of documents, whatever.

Under this schedule, we already have police officers who are exempt; in fact, we have already heard the Premier tell us proudly that under his watch there are permanent police officers on the lands. Have any of the issues, which are yet undefined but which are the basis of this legislation that has come to us for urgent review so that the minister can intervene, been reported to the police either visiting on the lands or on the lands?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: The advice is that the information from police is that they make no comment about information that they have or have not received from their investigations.

Ms CHAPMAN: I am not asking, minister, whether the police make any comment. I am asking whether the minister, or any representative of the minister, to his knowledge has reported these matters to the police, not whether the police have done anything about it or what actions have been taken, just whether there have been any reports of alleged misbehaviour in some way.

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: My advice is, no, there has not.

Ms CHAPMAN: In relation to the question of what can currently be referred to the ICAC, which is everything from misconduct across to corruption, in respect of any matters that are in that category where there is a suspected criminal offence have any matters been referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: Sorry, I was listening to two things at once. What was the last bit of your question about who has gone?

Ms CHAPMAN: In respect of any matters from misconduct across to corruption, obviously where there is a suspected criminal offence, have any of those matters which are in the category of circumstances or events that we do not know about, which are undisclosed but somewhere there weighing on the minister's mind, have any of those matters been referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: No, they have not.

Ms CHAPMAN: To your knowledge, have any of these events or circumstances been referred to the Office for Public Integrity?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: As you are aware, I am unable to comment about anything relating to references to the Office for Public Integrity.

Ms CHAPMAN: Is it your understanding, minister, that although this clause is desirous to enable the commissioner himself to attend—someone who is not a police officer—for him to be able to attend this clause would have to go through, but at present police officers are already able to access the lands without a permit?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: That is correct.

Ms CHAPMAN: If any of the officers who currently work for ICAC are commissioned and operating police officers, they could already attend the lands; is that correct?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I presume, without being in detailed possession of knowledge of the act, that that must be true. The advice I have just been given, which may or may not add anything to what the honourable member already knows, in reference to the meeting with the APY representatives on 21 November—and I am reading from Hansard in the other place—the meeting included the majority of APY Executive members, including Mr Singer, Mr Adamson, Mr George, Mr Baker, Mr Pompey, Mr Tjami, Mr Graham Harbord and Ms Lesley Johns, and it was in his office. I suspect that did not go to the question you asked.

Mr MARSHALL: My question is: will you be providing that information today? Given the fact that the government whip has actually just spoken to somebody who is alleged to be have been at the meeting, and you are sitting next to someone who is alleged to have been at the meeting, are you genuinely saying to this committee, are you genuinely treating this committee with such disrespect, that you will not answer a simple question that is put to you?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: I am not in possession of any information that I am not conveying. The advice, in seeking an answer to your question, is that I have been directed to that in Hansard. Otherwise, as I said, I have taken it on notice.

Mr MARSHALL: What about the question of whether the minister had actually consulted with the Commissioner for Aboriginal Engagement, as a commitment that that would be sorted out?

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE: Similarly, I was directed to a piece—and I have just lost that place now. As I understand it, the minister was asked that last night and said 'No, I have not,' as an answer. I understood it was the case that he had said that on Hansard yesterday.

Clause passed.

Title passed.

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Minister for Manufacturing and Innovation, Minister for Automotive Transformation, Minister for the Public Sector) (17:46): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Is that seconded?

An honourable member: Yes.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: For the question say aye, against say no. The ayes have it. Mr Clerk.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I put it and no-one said anything. Now I am asking Mr Clerk to read it a third time.

Ms Chapman interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: If you speak at this point it is only about changes to the bill, and there have been no changes in committee.

Mr Marshall: There were amendments, actually.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well, I did put the question.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I did put the question. There is no dissent to that.

Ms CHAPMAN: Deputy Speaker, you may have put the question but it has not been read a third time at this point. The Clerk is about to do that—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No; the minister has moved that it be read a third time and I have put the question.

Ms CHAPMAN: Yes, and we are about to speak on that question.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: And I just said that it has been put. In any case, if you had a question it would only be about changes in committee and there were none, so I am not sure how much you want to say.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No; I have accepted that. I am trying to be as helpful as I can by reminding you that you can only comment on changes within committee and that there were none, so there would be very little you could say at this point.

Ms CHAPMAN: There were a number of amendments that were made in the bill that came to us—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is my advice. Irrespective of the fact that I have already put it and, in trying to be accommodating to you, because there were no changes within committee and you must confine your remarks, at this point, to changes in committee, there would be very little you could say at this point.

Mr MARSHALL: With respect, what was the Attorney-General doing with his third reading speech just 10 minutes ago regarding the SACAT amendment bill?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: At that point we had not put it. We have put this.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am advised that that was a different perspective. Irrespective of all that, the question was put and that is an end to it, as far as I know.

Ms Chapman: That's quite disgraceful.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I did not see you standing. It all happened, and that is the end.

Ms CHAPMAN: With respect, Deputy Speaker, my understanding is that you put that the bill be read a third time and the leader rose to speak on that.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No. I think Hansard will show that I said, 'Those in favour say aye, against no; the ayes have it,' as it was my understanding that we were going through.

Mr Marshall: Maybe we should check with Hansard.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: That may be the case, but we will continue in the meantime. Mr Clerk.

Bill read a third time and passed.

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