The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: As members will be aware, in recent months there has been increasing clamour from a number of commentators and others for an independent commission against crime and corruption in South Australia. I think many people are asking why in particular Attorney-General Atkinson and Premier Rann are so fearful of the establishment of a commission against crime and corruption in South Australia. We are aware that this is the most secretive government that we have ever seen in the state’s history. Its performance in relation to freedom of information, questions on notice and answering questions in the chamber, together with its secrecy right across the board, is testimony to that title. I was interested to see in the past 48 hours a most important statement from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Stephen Pallaras. For the record, I refer to an interview with Bevan and Abraham. Matthew Abraham asked:
“Have there been issues here, and obviously for obvious reasons we can’t name them, but have there been issues that have come up in the public domain here in South Australia. . . that you have thought. . . `a corruption commission would have a bit of fun with that one or it would be interesting. . . sifting down through that one’?”
Mr Pallaras answered:
“On the basis that I can’t name them the answer is yes, there have been. And I’m sorry I can’t go much further than that.”
David Bevan asked, `Serious issues?’ Pallaras answered yes. David Bevan asked:
“. . . let’s be quite clear, I don’t want to be unfair to you, you’re saying that in the two years you’ve been in Adelaide you’ve become aware of things which you think should be the subject of an independent commission into corruption or crime. . . and you consider those things to be serious?”
Mr Pallaras’s answer is a simple, unequivocal, yes. Here we have in South Australia the man touted by the Rann govern¬ment as Eliot Ness asking for an independent commission against crime and corruption. He says quite clearly that, in his important and privileged position, he is aware of instances which should have gone to a commission against crime and corruption. All of us in this chamber are aware of the issues that Mr Pallaras is hinting at. We are all aware of what some of those particular issues might be.
Indeed, members of this chamber are hard at work looking at issues which, clearly, if there was a commission against crime and corruption in South Australia, would have been referred to that commission. There is no doubt that if we had a crime and corruption commission in South Australia the issues of Atkinson, Ashbourne and Clarke would have been the subject of—
The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: On a point of order, Mr President.
The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: Here we go again. The Attorney-General is here so they have to perform for the Attorney-General.
The PRESIDENT: Order!
The Hon. R.I. Lucas interjecting:
The PRESIDENT: Order!
The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: A wholly-owned subsidiary—up they pop!
The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Mr Lucas will come to order!
The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: My point of order is that the Hon. Rob Lucas should be naming members of parliament by their correct descriptions.
The Hon. R.I. Lucas interjecting:
The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Mr Lucas will come to order. Start the clock.
The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: Are you going to perform?
The PRESIDENT: Order! Start the clock; he is on his feet.
The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: There is no doubting that, if there had been a commission against crime and corruption in South Australia, the Attorney-General, the Premier and others would have been required to give evidence in relation to a number of circumstances that have been the subject of public debate over recent periods, and—
The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY: Point of order, Mr President. It is my understanding that a select committee is still in place in relation to the matters to which the Hon. Rob Lucas is now referring. I suggest to you that it is out of order for him to refer to the business before that select committee.
The PRESIDENT: The honourable member will not refer to any business that is being heard by any select committee. The Hon. Mr Lucas knows the rules and the standing orders, and he knows he is not to refer to any evidence or any matter that might be discussed before the select committee.
The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: The government’s wholly-owned subsidiaries in this chamber for the Labor right are very sensitive about issues that relate to the puppet-master, the Attorney-General, the organ-grinder. The sensitivity of the Leader of the Government and, indeed, the Hon. Mr Finnigan on these issues knows no bounds. There is no doubt, as I said, that they would have been required to give evidence. In closing, again I refer to the statements from the Director of Public Prosecutions yesterday. Let me finish on this note, which is relevant to this notion of a commission against crime and corruption. Mr Pallaras said:
“It seems to strike fear into the hearts of principally politicians who fear the footsteps or the knock on the door.”
I refer those comments to the Attorney-General and to the Premier.
