HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2020-07-21 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Grievance Debate

Members, Accommodation Allowances

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens) (15:18): It has turned out that the Hon. Terry Stephens was not alone. What we see here is an organised industrial cover-up, led by the Premier, to protect his ministers. We had the Premier giving talking points to the media that he knew in advance what was going to be tabled in the parliament. The minister said to the parliament that he has already repaid the money. That is pretty quick invoicing. He writes a letter yesterday establishing that he has inappropriately claimed money, an invoice has been issued and he has paid it already.

I have to say that we on this side of the house have grave concerns about the integrity of the government and the way they are conducting themselves. Any minister found to have inappropriately claimed an entitlement they are not entitled to has broken the law. It should not be referred to the Auditor-General: it should be referred to police. That is the appropriate authority. If a taxpayer takes money they are not entitled to, it is not the Auditor-General who knocks on their door: it is South Australia Police.

I have to say: why is there one rule for Liberal Party ministers and another rule for everyone else? How is it possible that these ministers simply think they can investigate themselves, do an audit themselves, decide how much they have to pay back themselves, and then pay it back and say we should thank them because they are being open and transparent? That is not how it works.

How it works is they stand down or they are sacked and then you have an independent inquiry. An independent inquiry investigates how much they have inappropriately taken from the taxpayer and for how long. Was it deliberate or inadvertent? Was there ambiguity or was it a racket? Did they incur expenses? How much money should they pay back and should criminal charges be laid?

I can also say this: the Auditor-General continually complains to this parliament about his ability to access documents because of privilege. The opposition does not wish to diminish the privileges of this parliament, but if there is criminality there is no excuse—no excuse whatsoever. This house is littered with examples where parliamentarians have been under criminal investigation and the parliament has waived privilege and allowed police to enter the building and examine documents and officers.

Criminality should not be tolerated. I do not know if members opposite have broken the law. All I know is what they have told us. What they have told us is they claimed money they were not entitled to. They claim it is an administrative error, or so they tell us, and they claim their officers did a check.

Apparently, while the member for Schubert, the Minister for Infrastructure, was staying with mum and dad he was incurring expenses. I cannot imagine the CEO of Barossa Fine Foods charging his son board while being in Adelaide. Maybe he did, but I would like to know some details. If he was not entitled to claim that money, that is not a matter the member can remedy himself, otherwise we are no longer a land of laws.

The rule of law should apply equally to everyone. That is why we are here. One of the reasons we do not call each other by our first and last names in this parliament is that we are not here for ourselves: we are here for our communities. I am the member for West Torrens, not Anastasious Koutsantonis. I am here representing my community. The rule of law applies to all South Australians equally, including ministers of the Crown, and if they have broken the law the book should be thrown at them.

I also point out that there are two public officers who answer directly to the Minister for Infrastructure and who had to stand down. What were they stood down for? Inappropriate claiming of travel allowances. I do not want to go into the details of the current court proceedings or any other sub judice matter, but it is fair to say that the amounts we are talking about there are far less than they have claimed.

Yet the Premier can just simply say, 'Look, the minister is a good bloke and I trust him.' There is a thorough internal process in his office about whether or not he is entitled to claim this money. He decides these are the dates he has inappropriately claimed and then he asks for an invoice, and the parliament quite properly sends an invoice out and it is paid. That is not how investigations are run. Investigations are run independently of the individuals. This is a sham and ministers need to stand down.

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