HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2025-05-14 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

Summary Offences (Humiliating, Degrading or Invasive Depictions) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Debate resumed.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clause 1.

Mr BATTY: I appreciate this is a bill that has come from the other place, but I am just curious as to whether the assistant minister has conducted any consultation himself on this bill and, if so, what the outcome of that consultation was.

Mr BROWN: I have not personally conducted any consultations. I know the Attorney-General's Department has conducted some consultation, but mostly with people such as South Australia Police and others, to get their input on the bill. I should indicate that this bill comes as a result, largely, of evidence that was given to the select committee from SAPOL themselves about how this conduct is becoming more and more prevalent in South Australia. They also agreed that there were some concerns about whether existing state legislation covered this conduct.

Mr BATTY: The assistant minister mentioned the select committee, which I think he chaired. Was this a recommendation from that select committee, a bill in this form?

Mr BROWN: The bill itself was not necessarily a recommendation. It should again be pointed out that this particular entity that we are dealing with is actually a private member's bill that was introduced by the Hon. Connie Bonaros in the other place and has now come down to us, but it is correct that at least the examination of potential legislation in this space was a recommendation of the select committee.

Mr BATTY: On the select committee recommendations, has the assistant minister implemented any of the other recommendations of that committee since becoming the Assistant Minister for Artificial Intelligence?

Mr BROWN: We might be straying a little bit away from the bill there, Acting Chair, but that is okay. There are a number of recommendations that are currently being considered by government. Off the top of my head, this is the first one that we have implemented, or are seeking to implement, but from memory all of them, other than this one, are currently underway. Most of them call upon the government to consider particular things, such as investments in AI and other things like that. They are all being actively considered by government.

The ACTING CHAIR (Mr Odenwalder): Member for Bragg, any more on clause 1?

Mr BATTY: Perhaps just one more, coming out of that answer. When will the other recommendations be implemented? I assume, from your answer, the government now accepts all of the recommendations. When can we expect them to be implemented?

The ACTING CHAIR (Mr Odenwalder): Before the assistant minister answers, that is outside the scope of this bill. He can answer it if he wishes to, or he does not have to.

Mr BROWN: I think it is an important issue that the parliament should be made aware of, regardless of whether the member for Bragg is in fact inside the standing orders or not. There are a number of recommendations of the select committee. In fact, as the former Chair of the committee I thought they were good recommendations. The government is actively considering all of them.

When will they be implemented? When they are ready. Has the government made a decision on them? Not necessarily. My advice to the member for Bragg is to wait and watch, and you will be told when we have made a decision on them. I would anticipate that there would be a result from the government, a formal response from the select committee report, in the not too distant future.

Clause passed.

Clause 2.

Mr BATTY: Can the assistant minister explain this clause and why we cannot simply have a commencement clause on assent?

Mr BROWN: Far be it from me to explain to the member for Bragg how commencement clauses work, but the reason why it is not on assent is, firstly, I understand it is generally the policy of parliamentary counsel to encourage you to do proclamation rather than assent, because proclamation gives you flexibility. We would not want a situation where we try to hold up assent to this bill because police and others tell us they are not exactly ready to enforce it just yet. That is one of the reasons why proclamation was chosen rather than assent. There is nothing nefarious there. There is no ulterior motive. It simply creates extra flexibility for those people who actually have to enforce this law.

Mr BATTY: Have the police or others told you they are not ready to enforce this bill that we are debating today?

Mr BROWN: No, I have not been informed that SAPOL are expressing the view that they are not currently ready. It is simply a matter of weighing up whether you have a bill that takes place on assent or whether it takes place on proclamation and weighing up which one of the two you want to choose. In this particular case, because of the flexibility it introduces, proclamation was chosen.

Mr BATTY: Is the assistant minister able to share any detail on when he expects the legislation to commence if we pass it today?

Mr BROWN: No, I am not able to inform the parliament of that today, but if it is something that is very important to the member for Bragg, I am sure I can seek to get an answer and indicate to him when it will be proclaimed.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI: Is it the intent of the legislation to prohibit the production or the display of such material and—

The ACTING CHAIR (Mr Odenwalder): Member for Unley, we are debating clause 2 at the moment, which is the commencement date.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI: This is a preamble to my question.

The ACTING CHAIR (Mr Odenwalder): Alright, I will hear the preamble.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI: The reason I ask that question is that, after proclamation, if content has been produced and is being displayed, will it be an offence for that to continue to be displayed? Is it an offence to produce such material after proclamation but not display it?

Mr BROWN: All I can give the house is the commencement provision, which I am happy to read out again if you like: 'This Act comes into operation on a day to be fixed by proclamation.' This clause, which we are currently debating, means that, as it says, this particular bill will become the law of the land on a day fixed by proclamation at some stage. On that day when the proclamation takes place, this bill, in whatever form it passes the parliament, will be enlivened.

Clause passed.

Clause 3.

Mr BATTY: This is the bulk of the bill, including the new offences and a definitions clause. I am interested in some of the definitions around, critically, 'humiliating depiction' and also 'invasive depiction' on page 3 of the bill. It includes almost the exemption that an invasive depiction is not taken to be an invasive depiction if it 'falls within the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults'. Is the assistant minister able to share any examples of what might fall into that sort of category?

Mr BROWN: Far be it from me to advise the member for Bragg about what morality, decency and propriety means for the general person. I take it he is a relatively upstanding member of the community, so I think he is capable of knowing where that line stands. It should be pointed out that the bill largely carries on from existing legislation that is in this space. I am not today able to furnish the member for Bragg with any case law on this particular subject, but I understand that the law is relatively well settled in this particular regard.

Mr BATTY: So that sort of morality and decency generally accepted—for example, under humiliating depiction we have exclusions for minor or moderate embarrassment—is not novel drafting; it is in existing legislation?

Mr BROWN: That is my understanding, yes.

Mr BATTY: There is a number of new offences created in this bill. Is the assistant minister intending an education campaign around the new offences? If so, when will that campaign commence and what is the budget for that campaign?

Mr BROWN: No budget has been allocated for a specific education campaign at this stage, but I absolutely agree with the member for Bragg that if you are going to pass laws that are supposed to have an educative effect you would probably want to educate people about it. I have already made some inquiries about an education campaign on this particular part of the law, but it is certainly something I will be continuing to progress if and when this bill passes.

Mr BATTY: Thank you for indicating that you will look into a budget for an education campaign. Does the new assistant minister have any new budget or staff attached to his new portfolio?

Mr BROWN: Sir, this is not estimates. I do not—

An honourable member interjecting:

Mr BROWN: I would like to say to my colleagues, please: I know the member for Bragg is a big supporter of this particular area and he has said many fine words about me before, and I am happy to take that. I am cognisant of his inquiries and keenness to know and understand what I am up to, which is great, fantastic. Unfortunately, this is not the forum for such questions.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI: Can the member explain what safeguards exist to ensure that subjective interpretations of humiliation and degradation are applied consistently under this legislation?

Mr BROWN: I have great confidence in not only SA Police but also the prosecutorial authorities in our state. I reject any assertion that they do not apply such things consistently. Again, I have confidence that they will do so.

The Hon. D.G. PISONI: Can the member explain why content under part 5A is excluded, and could this unintentionally allow harmful content to escape regulation?

Mr BROWN: Sorry, which part of the—

The Hon. D.G. PISONI: Part 5A of the act itself is excluded under the amendment, the clause we are currently debating. I am referring to the act itself, and the act itself is referred to in this clause. It provides, 'but does not include content that consists of or incorporates an image within the meaning of part 5A'. If you go to the act there is a description of what part 5A is referring to. The question I am asking is: could this exclusion unintentionally allow harmful content to escape regulation? Is that something you have reviewed, and are you able to advise the committee?

Mr BROWN: I can check the act for the member, but I should point out it is probably not necessary for us to debate clauses that are already in existing legislation, whether they should be accepted or not. If the member is asking me about the interplay of the existing bill to part 5A exemptions that exist, I should point out to the committee that the exemptions that currently exist will continue. Again, the intent of the legislation is simply to extend the current humiliating and degrading provisions to wholly generated AI content.

Clause passed.

Title passed.

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

Mr BROWN (Florey) (11:03): 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