HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2010-05-26 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

MEMBERS' REMARKS

Adjourned debate on motion of the Hon. M.C. Parnell:

That this council—

1. Notes the decision of the Supreme Court on 9 April 2010 in the matter of White and Others against the State of South Australia.

2. Notes with alarm the misguided intervention of the two government ministers in this case, namely, the Treasurer (Hon. K.O. Foley) and the Minister for Police (Hon. M.J. Wright).

3. Notes the remarks of His Honour Justice Anderson that the comments of the ministers were unfounded, unreasonable, antagonistic, unjustified and offensive and that His Honour increased the award of damages to the plaintiffs by $135,000 as a direct consequence of the ministers' behaviour.

4. Calls on the Treasurer and the Minister for Police to apologise to the South Australian people for the impact their comments have had on the finances of the state.

(Continued from 12 May 2010.)

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister Assisting the Premier in Public Sector Management) (21:00): I rise to oppose this motion. The matter of White and Others against the state of South Australia is the result of events that occurred between 7 and 9 May 2000 at the Beverley uranium mine. On 7 May several protesters were arrested for various offences such as tying themselves to a vehicle-mounted drill rig and breach of the peace, but were later released on the same day. There were no major incidents at the protest site the following day.

However, on 9 May about 100 protesters jumped the Beverley uranium mine fence and entered the mine site. Legal action arising from the police response was commenced by 11 protesters and two others in the Supreme Court of South Australia. Recently on 9 April 2010 the Supreme Court of South Australia handed down its judgment on White and Others v the State of South Australia. The plaintiffs were awarded a total of $724,560 in damages plus costs. Exemplary damages of $15,000 each were awarded to the nine plaintiffs who were arrested and detained, or $135,000 in total.

The central premise of this motion is false: namely that $135,000 of exemplary damages was awarded as a direct result of comments made by two government ministers to the media. It is incorrect to assert that $135,000 in exemplary damages was awarded solely because of the comments made by the Treasurer and the police minister. When assessing exemplary damages Justice Anderson took into consideration the circumstances in which the plaintiffs were detained and arrested, in addition to the comments made by the two ministers. The judgment does not provide a cost breakdown of how the exemplary damages were decided. Even though the Treasurer and the police minister made reference to the plaintiffs collectively, not all the plaintiffs in this case were awarded exemplary damages. Only those plaintiffs who were detained in a shipping container were awarded exemplary damages.

The Hon. Mark Parnell also criticises the government for choosing to defend the case rather than settle the matter before trial. He argues that it was financially irresponsible to take the matter to trial and that the government should have instructed its lawyers to negotiate a settlement. While the court ultimately held the state of South Australia liable in this action, the government had every right to defend this matter in court. South Australia Police have the full support and confidence of this government. Police officers are expected to operate in stressful and often dangerous circumstances, and the protest action at the Beverley mine was clearly one of those instances. When police are faced with a peaceful protest, there is mutual respect and things stay calm; however, increasingly too many protesters get caught up in the mob mentality and become aggressive and threatening.

The violent clashes of the past decade at the G20 summit in Sydney, the World Economic Forum in Melbourne, and the Baxter Detention Centre in 2003 and 2005 all demonstrate that protests can often suddenly become riots. I saw some absolutely disgraceful behaviour at the World Economic Forum in Melbourne, where protesters threw large plastic garbage bins at police. It was some of the most disgraceful public behaviour I have ever seen. In that instance the police showed great restraint, given the provocation they faced.

When confronted with this type of behaviour, it is essential that South Australia Police know that their government will back them, not just in words but with action. Sometimes there is a political or financial cost to the government for giving that support, and in this case the government supported the police both in the media and the courtroom. This government is frequently criticised by the opposition and minor parties for its tough stance on law and order, but this government makes no apology for supporting South Australia Police in this matter.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. B.V. Finnigan.

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