LSB February 2018_Web_LSSA

POLITICS AND THE LAW
and the Newspaper had no defence. This
decision was appealed to the Full Court.
The Attorney-General intervened and his
argument can be summarised as follows:
• A court cannot inquire into the truth
of what is spoken in Parliament or the
motive of a member when speaking in
Parliament. It is doubtful whether this
privilege can be waived.
• A court can receive admissible evidence
to prove as a fact that a particular
statement was made in Parliament.
Parliamentary privilege may render
inadmissible some otherwise relevant
evidence on this topic. However,
Hansard can be received in evidence for
this purpose.
• Any person who is attacked by a speech
in Parliament has a qualified privilege
to publicly answer that attack. The
qualified privilege will apply so long as
the answer is a reasonable response to
the attack and is not actuated by malice.
The truth or otherwise of the answer
need not be proved.
The Attorney-General was not successful.
Two Judges of the Supreme Court were
of the view that in the circumstances
of this case in particular, a defendant
faced with an action by a Member of
Parliament for defamation has a right in
those circumstances to cross-examine
the Member of Parliament as to the
facts of the statement which was made
in the Parliament and to which a citizen’s
response may related, the motives and even
the sources of information.
Subsequent to the decision of the Full
Court, the then Attorney-General sought
leave to appeal to the High Court based
on the same argument that he put to the
Full Supreme Court. However, he later
withdrew, indicating his concern that this
was the worst possible case on its facts
to use as a vehicle to test the extent of
Parliamentary privilege. He recommended
that Parliament should consider the
issue of privilege unencumbered by
the potentially unjust case then being
considered. The Parliament could then
consider whether legislation to cover
privilege should be introduced.
Subsequently, a Joint Committee of the
Parliament was established to examine
the extent of Parliamentary privilege and
the means by which such privilege may be
enunciated and protected in the interests
of the community and the institution
of Parliament. The Committee never
reported. At the time, it was felt that to
introduce legislation defining Parliamentary
privilege may indeed limit the privileges
attained by the South Australian Parliament
in Section 38 of the Constitution Act 1934,
which extends “the privileges, immunities and
powers of the Legislative Council and House of
Assembly respectively, and of the Committees and
members thereof respectively, to those held by the
House of Commons as at 24 October 1856”.
It was not until 1999 that the then
Attorney-General moved for a Sessional
Standing Order according a Citizen’s
Right of Reply in the Legislative Council.
The Sessional Standing Order enables
persons who believe that they have been
adversely referred to during proceedings
of the Council to request that a response
be incorporated in Hansard. This has been
adopted in every subsequent Session of
Parliament in the Legislative Council and
by the House of Assembly since 2007. B
Jan Davis retired on 31 December 2017 after
53 years on the Staff of the Legislative Council
Challenging cancer
Leading the way towards a cancer free future
LINCOLN SIZE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, CANCER COUNCIL SA
Every day, 26 South Australians will Our essential support services have
hear the words “you have cancer.” It’s continued to change lives, with more
a sobering statistic, and one that highlights than 30,500 nights of accommodation
the impact of cancer in our community. provided through the Cancer Council
Over the last 12 months Cancer Council Lodges based at Flinders and Greenhill,
SA has made great strides in reducing the and more than 6,400 people receiving
impact of cancer on all South Australians. information and support from our Cancer
As the only organisation to work across Council nurses. We have empowered
every area and every type of cancer, we are South Australians of all ages to reduce
proud to invest in ongoing cancer research, their cancer risk, with smoking rates in
lead life-changing prevention activities, South Australia the lowest ever recorded at
pioneer advancements in advocacy and 14.9%, largely influenced by our advocacy
provide essential support services. work along with our Quitline and Quitskills
In the last year alone, Cancer Council’s programs.
Beat Cancer Project has funded more We are also proud to lead cancer
than 200 research initiatives, with every prevention amongst our younger
$1 donated by the community funding $4 generations, with more than 110,000
worth of research.
South Australian children now protected
from harmful UV radiation through our
SunSmart program.
All of these achievements are not
possible without the tireless work of our
staff, volunteers, ambassadors, donors,
fundraisers and corporate partners
which last year alone, enabled us to raise
$9.3million, which will directly impact
the lives of the more than 9,700 South
Australians diagnosed with cancer every
year.
We couldn’t do what we do without you,
and through your generous support, every
minute, every hour, every day we’re getting
closer to a cancer free future.
To find out more about Cancer Council
SA and how you can make a difference
visit www.cancersa.org.au.
February 2018 THE BULLETIN 39