HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2025-09-04 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

Summary Offences (Prohibition of Publication of Certain Material) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence) (16:51): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I am really pleased to introduce the Summary Offences (Prohibition of Publication of Certain Material) Amendment Bill 2025 to this house. It is a really timely and important bill that responds to community concern about an issue that has emerged in the past few years. It is a bill that acknowledges that we live in a world in which technology continues to rapidly evolve. Whilst this comes with excellent opportunities to share information, it has also created an environment in which information can be distributed for nefarious and harmful purposes, sometimes with devastating consequences.

Recent reports of young people posting material on social media platforms to brag about their involvement in crime, a practice known as posting and boasting, have raised concerns about the risk of harm to the community, including other young people and sometimes the young people involved themselves through the promotion of crime and community exposure to offensive material.

Our government is determined to act to tackle new ways in which crime is perpetrated and information about it is distributed, promoted and, sadly, sometimes celebrated. To address rightful community concerns, this bill criminalises posting and boasting through the creation of a new standalone offence.

The bill proposes to insert a new offence of publishing material depicting an offence in the Summary Offences Act 1953. The offence has a maximum penalty of two years' imprisonment. It will apply if a person publishes material depicting conduct constituting, or apparently constituting, a prescribed offence, if the person publishes the material with the intention of encouraging, glorifying or promoting the conduct, or to increase a person's notoriety because of their involvement in the depicted conduct.

To respond to the contemporary ways in which information is shared in our community, 'publish' means publish by electronic means and will include the posting, uploading or sharing of material via the internet, on a social media platform or other electronic platform. A 'prescribed offence' means any offence involving driving or operating a vehicle or vessel, violence, weapons, damage or destruction of property, theft or criminal trespass.

The regulations will allow for an offence or class of offences to be included in or excluded from the definition of a prescribed defence. Offences against the law of another jurisdiction that would, if committed in South Australia, constitute any of the offences I have just outlined, will also be considered a prescribed offence for the purposes of the posting and boasting offence.

A person may be charged with the new offence whether or not the person or any other person has been or will be charged with the related prescribed offence. This means that a person can be charged or convicted of the posting and boasting offence even if the person was not involved in the prescribed offence depicted in the published material. It will be a defence to a charge of the new offence if the defendant proves that the depicted conduct did not constitute a prescribed offence.

Additionally, a person will be taken not to have committed the new offence if the publication was for a legitimate public purpose. Publication of material will be taken to be for a legitimate public purpose if the publication was in the public interest, having regard to various factors, for example, whether the publication was for the purpose of educating or informing the public, for the purpose of publishing a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest, or a work of artistic merit. Regulations will create the ability to prescribe other factors, with the onus lying on the prosecution to prove that the publication was not for a legitimate public purpose.

Finally, to ensure that the penalty imposed for the new offence is rightly not disproportionately high compared to the maximum penalty for the prescribed offence depicted in the published material, the bill provides that a penalty imposed for the posting and boasting offence must not exceed the maximum penalty that may be imposed for the related prescribed offence. This bill is intended to promote the safety of our community through the prevention of crime and its promotion on social media. It will also send a really clear message that crime causes harm and is not something to be glorified in any way. I commend the bill to the house and seek leave to insert the explanation of clauses into Hansard without my reading it.

Leave granted.

Explanation of Clauses

Part 1—Preliminary

1—Short title

2—Commencement

These clauses are formal.

Part 2—Amendment of Summary Offences Act 1953

3—Insertion of section 21AA

This clause inserts new section 21AA as follows:

21AA—Publishing material depicting offence etc

This clause provides that a person who publishes material depicting conduct constituting, or apparently constituting, a prescribed offence with the intention of encouraging, glorifying or promoting the conduct, or increasing the person's, or another person's, notoriety because of their involvement in the conduct, is guilty of an offence. A person may be charged with an offence against this clause whether or not a person has been or is to be charged with the prescribed offence.

An exemption is provided where the publication of the material was for a legitimate public purpose. The clause also provides a defence against a charge of an offence against this clause for the defendant to prove that the conduct the material depicted did not constitute a prescribed offence.

Ms O'HANLON (Dunstan) (16:58): I rise in support of the Summary Offences (Prohibition of Publication of Certain Material) Amendment Bill 2025. This bill deals with a phenomenon that has grown across the world and, sadly, in our state, the disturbing trend of so-called posting and boasting. We have seen too many instances where people have used social media to glorify or celebrate criminal acts, treating serious offences as if they were trophies to be displayed online.

What drives this behaviour is the recognition and notoriety that can come from publishing such material. For the perpetrators, there is a thrill in showing off to their peers. For victims, however, the consequences are devastating. Not only must they cope with the immediate harm, be it the theft of their car, vandalism of property or a physical or sexual assault, but they are then subjected to public humiliation when the offence is uploaded, shared and even mocked online.

The Malinauskas government believes this is unacceptable. It is bad enough for a young person to be assaulted in a coward's punch or attacked at school but to then have the video circulated among classmates or broadcast across the internet compounds the trauma. We have seen this all too often. That is why this bill matters.

We are not alone in addressing this issue. Other jurisdictions, including New South Wales, Queensland and the commonwealth, have already moved to criminalise posting and boasting, and South Australia must not lag behind. This legislation brings us into line with those jurisdictions and ensures our community is better protected from the harm caused by the glorification of crime.

The bill inserts a new section into the Summary Offences Act 1953, creating an offence of publishing material depicting a prescribed offence with the intention of encouraging, glorifying or promoting that conduct or of increasing the notoriety of those involved. The maximum penalty is two years' imprisonment, subject to the important caveat that the punishment cannot exceed the penalty for the underlying offence. This ensures fairness that those who post are not held to a higher account than those who commit the crime itself.

The types of prescribed offences are serious and are carefully defined. They include:

offences involving vehicles, such as high-speed joyriding or vehicle theft;

offences involving violence or threats of violence, such as assaults and coward's punches;

offences involving weapons;

offences involving damage to property;

theft, robbery and related offences; and

trespass and related offences.

The bill also recognises the importance of balance. It does not prevent the publication and material for a legitimate public purpose. That includes fair and accurate reporting by journalists, educational material, works of artistic merit, publication for law enforcement or public safety purposes, and for medical, legal or scientific reasons. The onus lies on the prosecution to prove a publication was not legitimate. This safeguard ensures freedom of speech and responsible reporting are preserved, while malicious posting and boasting is stamped out.

Imagine a group of people stealing a car and live streaming themselves speeding through suburban streets. They laugh as they run red lights and narrowly miss pedestrians. They live stream or share footage and get hundreds or thousands of comments turning reckless criminal conduct into a form of entertainment. Scenes like this could easily end in tragedy and they have before, at least twice in recent history that I can think of. But even if no lives are lost, the boasting, the glorification of this crime creates in the minds of some, sadly, heroes and encourages it to happen again. This bill ensures that such behaviour will carry consequences even for those who are not behind the wheel but who chose to glorify the crime online.

Importantly, while these laws will apply equally to everyone, we recognise that young South Australians are most at risk of being drawn into this behaviour. That is why the government will continue working with the Department of Education to ensure that young people understand the risks. The recent ban on mobile phones during school hours and the broader move to restrict social media use for those under 16 form part of this wider effort.

We cannot ignore the reality that every teenager now carries in their pocket what amounts to a film production studio. It is vital they understand that some content simply cannot be shared without serious consequences. This bill is about more than just criminalising harmful behaviour. It is about protecting victims from further trauma, about removing the incentive for criminals to seek notoriety and about making it clear that crime is not entertainment.

I commend the Attorney-General and the minister, those who have contributed to this bill. We have a responsibility to send a clear message: if you commit a crime and then choose to broadcast it, you will face the consequences. This bill does just that and, in doing so, it strengthens our justice system and safeguards our community. I commend this bill to the house.

Ms THOMPSON (Davenport) (17:03): We live in an age where the device in your pocket has more processing power than computers that took astronauts to the moon, and what do some people choose to do with this incredible technology? Film themselves stealing a car or starting a fight and then they upload it to TikTok. Well, that is not ingenuity. That is not rebellion. That is just idiocy filmed in HD. We have all seen it: clips of high-speed joyrides on our streets, often with offenders hanging out the windows, selfies taken seconds after smashing a shop window, grainy footage of coward's punches uploaded with hashtags like it is some kind of sport.

Well, it is posting and boasting—crime not just committed, but packaged up and promoted and pushed out for likes, shares and five seconds of notoriety. Let's be clear, this is not harmless showing off. For victims, it is a second round of trauma. First, they suffer the crime itself, then they are humiliated all over again when the crime becomes content on social media. This is not theoretical; it is happening here.

In South Australia, Instagram accounts have circulated schoolyard brawls for years. Students egged on fights, recorded them and shared them online. The humiliation for the victims does not vanish when the bruises heal. It lingers, replayed every time the footage is shared. In Adelaide, an anonymous account was brazenly encouraging people to film themselves drink driving, drifting, and then to send it in to be posted. Think about that: someone actively promoting dangerous criminal behaviour like it was a Friday night party trick. This bill is about shutting down that culture of crime as content.

This bill introduces a new offence in the Summary Offences Act. If you post material that glorifies, encourages or promotes crime, you can face up to two years' imprisonment. You will not face a harsher penalty than the original offender, but you will be held accountable for fanning the flames of criminal behaviour. The offences covered are not trivial. They include car theft and joyrides, assaults and coward's punches, weapons offences, property damage, robbery and trespass. These are the kinds of crimes that hurt families, that hurt small businesses and communities right across South Australia. If you upload and promote it, you can face up to two years' imprisonment.

Some might ask, 'Why criminalise it? Isn't it just kids mucking around on their phones?' Well, I will tell you: when your idea of fun is stealing a car at 2am, and uploading it with a Drake soundtrack, you are not mucking around—you are a menace. Frankly, if your greatest life achievement is becoming a viral idiot on Facebook, then maybe a short holiday from society, courtesy of our correctional system, is exactly what you need. We are still protecting free speech. This is not about silencing journalists, educators, law enforcement, legitimate reporting, public education or even artistic work. They are all protected. This law is targeted squarely at those who glorify crime, not those who shine a light on it.

We also need to be honest about the world our kids are growing up in. Every young person is walking around with a film studio in their pocket. While most use it for good, capturing sports games, music or family events, we need to teach them where the line is. That is why this bill goes hand in hand with the ban on phones during school hours and the ban on social media for under 16s. It is about protecting our kids from the false glamour of online crime culture and ensuring they understand the real-world consequences of what they post.

We are not alone in facing this problem, nor in acting on it. New South Wales and Queensland, even the commonwealth, have already moved to criminalise posting and boasting and other jurisdictions are moving in the same direction. South Australia cannot be left behind while crime is being turned into clickbait. This bill is about responsibility, it is about accountability and it is about respect, because South Australians deserve better than to be victims twice: first for the crime and then the online circus that follows.

So let's send a clear message: if you commit a crime, do not expect to go viral, do not expect likes and follows—expect the law. I commend this bill to the house.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (17:08): I rise to indicate I am the lead speaker for the opposition and indicate the opposition's support for the bill. I just emphasise a couple of things, including one of several concerns that the Law Society raised, and that is to make it clear that the offence that is the subject of the bill will be committed by the individual who publishes the relevant offending—certain prescribed offences—but they need not be engaged in the conduct of the offence itself. So it is very much targeted to the publication of material that is depicting a prescribed offence. In that way it is different to the law in Queensland, for example, where that is a circumstance of aggravation of the underlying offence that is going on, that is depicted in the publication. So to be clear about that, it stands alone.

In that regard there is at least a concern, or a question on my part, raised about whether or not knowing, as we do, that in plenty of circumstances the only evidence that is capable of proving the occurrence of the offence is the filming and the publication that is then available to prosecute the offence and whether that would have the effect of making it more difficult to prosecute offending. I understand that SAPOL's point of view is that there is a whole category, a whole raft of offending that just would not be occurring but for it providing an opportunity for somebody to film it and then publish the offending in the way that this bill is directed to be criminalising and providing sanction against.

Let's see that pan out and look to see a reduction in the underlying offence that is depicted. As we have heard in the course of the debate, let's see a change of behaviour to the extent that this filming of criminal conduct has become a trend in certain circles—let's see that ended and let's also keep a close eye on the evidence that is then used to prosecute offending.

On all of those fronts it will be necessary to keep an eye on how matters progress and let's continue to ensure that the prescribed offences that are the subject of the bill are happening less, that the so-called posting and boasting ceases and that we see a diminishment in both kinds of criminal conduct. I commend the bill to the house, and I look forward to seeing the results post its passage.

Ms HOOD (Adelaide) (17:12): In recent years we have seen an online trend emerge across the country of people not only committing crimes but filming themselves and sharing those crimes online for recognition and notoriety. Think street racing for views, the violent pub fight that goes viral, or bragging about graffiti on a significant or heritage building.

It is a phenomenon that has become known as posting and boasting. This behaviour is not harmless bravado: it fuels copycat conduct and it gives criminals the very thing that they seek, an audience. It deepens the trauma for victims who must endure not only the immediate harm of the offence but also the public humiliation of seeing it broadcast online for entertainment.

Our responsibility as legislators is to protect our communities from harm, and this bill sends a clear message that criminality is not content, offending is not a brand, violence and theft are not a stage for likes and clicks. This legislation creates a new offence in the Summary Offences Act for posting and boasting. Under the bill, a person who publishes photo, video or audio of a prescribed offence with the intention of encouraging, glorifying or promoting the conduct it portrays, regardless of whether or not they were personally involved in the offending, can face a penalty of up to two years imprisonment. It is important to note that the penalty of up to two years' imprisonment cannot exceed the maximum penalty of the underlying prescribed offence. That means that someone who boasts about a crime online will not be punished more harshly than the person who commits the crime itself.

The range of prescribed offences is significant. They include offences involving driving or operating a vehicle or vessel, such as high-speed joyrides and vehicle theft; offences involving violence or the threat of using violence, which captures fights and coward attacks; offences involving weapons; offences involving interference with, damage to or destruction of property; theft, robbery and related offences; and criminal trespass, or an offence in which trespass is an element.

This bill has been carefully designed to avoid overreach, because we recognise the need for clear exemptions for legitimate public purposes. That means journalists can continue to report fairly and accurately on matters of public interest. Artists can still create works of artistic merit. Law enforcement can use material for the purpose of public safety. Medical, legal and scientific purposes also remain protected. These exemptions strike the right balance between shutting down glorification of crime without impacting legitimate voices.

Other jurisdictions have also taken steps, such as New South Wales, Queensland and the commonwealth, in regard to criminalising posting and boasting. Although these laws apply to all South Australians, we know that this trend has a particular hold on younger people, who consume their news, socialise and express themselves on social media and live much of their lives through the phone that they carry in their pocket. We need to make sure our young people understand the boundaries and that crime is never entertainment. That is why it is important to work with the Department for Education to ensure our younger South Australians understand the risks and know what is acceptable or not.

This builds on recent reforms such as the ban on mobile phones in schools and also the ban on social media for those under 16, of which the conversation was led by our Premier, Peter Malinauskas, in South Australia. It also complements our significant $18 million-plus investment in civics and citizenship education. We are both protecting our kids and arming them with the knowledge and tools they need to live in an increasingly digital future.

This bill is about protecting victims, it is about stopping the spread of crime as entertainment, and it is about making sure South Australians can go about their lives without having their trauma replayed online for clicks. Posting and boasting is not just juvenile showing off: it is a scourge that amplifies harm, fuels further offending and corrodes community trust. With this bill, we are drawing a line. Criminal acts will not be celebrated, shared or glorified.

I want to thank the Attorney-General and his team, both in the department and in his office, for bringing this bill forward and for their careful and considered work. I acknowledge victims and their families, those who have had to relive their trauma when crimes against them were turned into online content. Their voices, their experiences and their resilience remind us of why this bill matters. I commend the bill to the house.

Mrs PEARCE (King) (17:17): I rise today to speak on the Summary Offences (Prohibition of Publication of Certain Material) Amendment Bill 2025. In recent years, there has been a growing and concerning trend of individuals using social media platforms to share content that both glorifies and boasts of criminal activity. These posts are not simply expressions of criminal intent. They often serve to incite further harm, intimidate victims and undermine our justice system.

As digital spaces increasingly influence public behaviour, our government is taking steps to prevent individuals from publishing material on social media in order to brag about their involvement in crime, also known as posting and boasting. I, along with many in the South Australian community, have watched on in horror at some of the videos and content that have been appearing online and the trends that occur as a result. It is particularly upsetting to see these dangerous lapses of judgement coming from children in our local communities.

The Malinauskas state government has made clear our intention to protect kids from the dangers that social media can present, whether that be through a total ban of mobile phones in schools—which fortunately has seen a positive impact both on the learning outcomes in the classroom and also on how young people are interacting with one another during recess and lunch and in their free time—or a pathway that I am particularly interested in, which is getting more kids involved in their community through the power of sport and active recreation.

We know if we have positive things to offer for young people to embrace, they are more likely to have opportunities to thrive and live more fulfilling lives. Criminalising posting and boasting is just another way we are looking out for our kids in the digital world. We are following other Australian jurisdictions such as New South Wales, Queensland and the commonwealth in helping to do more to protect our kids.

While these laws will apply to all, our government will work with the Department for Education to ensure our kids understand the risks, the danger and violence they perpetrate when filming and publishing a crime. Under this new offence, people who publish photo, video or audio of a prescribed offence with the intention to encourage, glorify or promote the conduct, whether or not they were involved in the offending themselves, will face a penalty of up to two years' imprisonment, so long as the penalty imposed does not exceed the maximum penalty that may be imposed for the relevant prescribed offence. This ensures that someone who commits a post and boast offence is not held to a stricter account than the person who commits the crime.

A prescribed offence can include an offence involving driving or operating a vehicle or vessel, which we have seen in high speed, joyriding and theft of vehicles, an offence including the threat of using violence, which captures fights and cowardly attacks, an offence involving a weapon, criminal trespass or an offence of which trespass is an element.

Of course, we understand that there are legitimate public interest reasons to publish material such as these. This new offence only applies to a person who has posted material depicting a prescribed offence as long as it is proved that they published the material for a prohibited purpose to be able to encourage, glorify or promote the conduct.

This means the offence will not cover the publication of offending material if the publication was for a legitimate public purpose, which includes:

the publication was for the purpose of educating or informing the public;

the publication was for the purpose of making or publishing a fair and accurate record of any event or matter of public interest;

the publication was for the purpose of a work of artistic merit;

the publication was for a purpose connected to law enforcement or public safety; or

the publication was for a medical, legal or scientific purpose.

This will ensure that the legitimate use of photos, videos and audio of criminal activity by media or law enforcement is not restricted.

Criminal behaviour should never be given a platform for glorification. As our community continues to adapt to the digital age that we are now living in, our laws must evolve to reflect the real-world consequences of online behaviour. This legislation is about upholding accountability, protecting victims and defending our kids against the influence of criminal activity. For those reasons, I commend the bill to the house.

Ms CLANCY (Elder) (17:23): I rise today in support of the Summary Offences (Prohibition of Publication of Certain Material) Amendment Bill 2025, which seeks to amend the Summary Offences Act 1953.

The bill before us today is about respect, it is about dignity and it is about ensuring the most vulnerable members of our community are not re-traumatised by the careless or sensationalist publication of offensive material.

We have seen a disturbing rise in the number of incidents where crimes are filmed and uploaded online to be bragged about. Violence or humiliation, or sometimes both, wrapped up as some kind of sick entertainment, is disgusting in and of itself, before we even start to consider the victims who are left to deal with the trauma, not just once during the experience but again and again as material posted online just does not go away.

This bill seeks to insert a new offence of publishing material depicting an offence in the Summary Offences Act. This includes photo, video or audio content of a prescribed offence. A prescribed offence includes an offence involving driving or operating a vehicle or vessel; an offence involving the use of or the threat of using violence, which captures fights and coward attacks; an offence involving a weapon; an offence involving interference with, damage to or destruction of property; theft or an offence of which theft is an element, such as robbery; or criminal trespass or an offence of which trespass is an element.

South Australians who publish this material with the intention to encourage, glorify or promote the conduct it betrays, whether or not they are involved in the offending themselves, will face a penalty of up to two years' imprisonment. The maximum penalty for this new posting and boasting offence cannot exceed the maximum penalty that may be imposed for the relevant prescribed offence, to ensure that they are not held to a stricter standard or account than the person who commits the crime that is being recorded. It is important to highlight that this new offence does not apply to the publication of such material for a legitimate public purpose, such as law enforcement or journalism.

When I was growing up, an incident in the schoolyard or out in the community would end when the police arrived or the courts had dealt with it. For children growing up today, a violent act can be replayed endlessly, with each share or repost forcing the victim to relive their trauma again and again. We have seen violent assaults circulated online before SA Police have even been called. We have seen schoolyard fights posted to TikTok or shared on Snapchat way before parents and caregivers have even been notified. In the most harrowing of cases, we have seen sexual assault and harassment filmed and posted online to dedicated revenge porn websites.

These are not isolated incidents; they are part of a wider trend that some of the darkest places of the internet are perpetuating onto our community and communities right across the world—a culture where crime is glorified, violence is amplified and trauma is monetised through more likes, shares, followers and subscribers. We need to say that enough is enough. The bill before us today takes a stand by criminalising posting and boasting in South Australia. Today also serves as an important reminder that compassion should come before content, and that the right response when someone is in danger is to actually help them, not to film them or pull out your phone.

The responsibility to see an end to this trend lies with each and every one of us. Social media companies also have a significant role to play to take stronger action to curtail this behaviour. Social media platforms and their algorithms should not reward violence and pain, and they should not continue to profit from violence while ignoring the trauma of victims. Instead, we can all play a role in encouraging a culture, particularly among younger South Australians, where pulling out a phone is not the first instinct when something goes wrong.

I think it is really, really important that we actually ensure we are educating young people about social media and the use of their phones. I am really pleased that the South Australian Malinauskas government took a lead by looking into a social media ban, which was quickly picked up by the federal Albanese government, and that that work is now being done.

I am sure a number of people in this place heard a speech by Australia's eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, to the Press Club maybe a couple of months ago. There is a really interesting way that she is looking at the social media ban, because I know that there have been some concerns around the idea that young people also need to be educated around how to use social media and through that use of it they can learn. She spoke about swimming between the flags: you do not just put your child into the ocean without teaching them how to swim and giving them a lot of understanding of what they are walking into, what they could potentially experience and what the potential risks are.

By putting a social media ban in place, she spoke about how it is actually just putting the pause button on. It is about creating a delay so that children have that time to have more conversations with the people around them and to actually learn what the risks are and what the dangers are of social media before they enter into it.

We also saw the mobile phone ban that was implemented by our government, as the member for King also raised. We know that the stats show that it has caused a big difference. Talking to school leaders and students, as well as teachers and parents, we know that it has made a big difference to them in a really positive way. Instead of hearing nothing at lunchtime and recess, when we enter into the courtyard or go out into the yard, we can actually hear kids playing and talking to one another, which is a huge win. We have also seen a reduction in negative behaviour because of the mobile phone ban.

In closing, I would like to thank the Attorney-General and everyone in his team for bringing another bill to this place, which forms part of our growing reform agenda to make South Australia a safer, fairer place for all. I commend this bill to the house.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence) (17:31): Very briefly, I thank everybody who has spoken in this debate. I think this is a very good example of what is possible when a government is determined to make reform that responds to contemporary community concerns, and when our parliament backs that reform we can move forward to tackle what is a new concern for our community.

I thank everybody for their speeches in this parliament that have certainly supported that need to make sure we are contemporary in our approach to responding to community concerns about crime and the new ways in which crime can be perpetrated. I also want to thank everybody from the Attorney-General's Department and the Attorney-General's office who have worked very hard toward this and, indeed, many other reforms that I am really proud our government has made.

Bill read a second time.

Third Reading

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence) (17:33): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

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