House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2020-07-23 Daily Xml

Contents

Members, Accommodation Allowances

Mr MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Leader of the Opposition) (14:15): My question is to the Premier. Is it acceptable for a minister to claim the country members' allowance to attend a birthday celebration, to attend a sporting event or to attend a concert?

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL (Dunstan—Premier) (14:15): The guidelines on this are clear. Members are required—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: —to be in Adelaide on parliamentary business or issues to do with meeting with constituents or a part of the role as an MP.

Mr Malinauskas: Mum and dad aren't his constituents.

The SPEAKER: Leader!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: It doesn't state that every second that you are in Adelaide this is required. I'm sure this would be exactly the same arrangement for the member for Giles who would come down.

Mr Malinauskas interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: The member for Giles, for example, can be down in Adelaide and quite rightfully claim the country MPs' allowance, but he might actually pop to the shop while he is here.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order, member for Hurtle Vale!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: If the Leader of the Opposition is suggesting a new standard, then that's one thing and we look forward to seeing his submission to the Remuneration Tribunal—

Ms Stinson interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Member for Badcoe!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: —hanging the member for Giles out because I don't think there is any way the member for Giles or the Hon. Clare Scriven, both of whom are from the—

Mr Picton: Don't drag them into it. They did the right thing.

The SPEAKER: Member for Kaurna!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: —Australian Labor Party, could possibly claim that every second they are in Adelaide claiming that allowance they are on parliamentary business—

Mr Hughes interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Member for Giles!

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: —the entire time. The answer to that is no, and that has never been the position of the Remuneration Tribunal. So the Leader of the Opposition is being deliberately tricky with regard to this issue. He knows the way that this should operate, but he does get confused. For example, it was only last week—we don't even have to go back to his ministerial career to look at some of the atrocities this guy has inflicted—

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Point of order.

The SPEAKER: Point of order. The Premier will be seated.

The Hon. S.S. MARSHALL: They don't want to hear it.

The SPEAKER: Be seated, please. The point of order is that a claim of that nature should be made by substantive motion—

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Yes, sir.

The SPEAKER: —and the Premier should probably not reflect on members when you start allegedly accusing them of being deliberately—whilst you didn't say 'misleading', you said 'tricky'. Some of those types of remarks are probably best left for a substantive motion if you are going to make them. I trust that has dealt with the member for West Torrens's grievance. I will listen to the Premier's—

The Hon. S.S. Marshall: No, that's all I have.

The SPEAKER: The Premier has concluded his answer. I'm going to switch to the member for Colton.