Mr BELL - 1994-12-01
Mr Speaker, I refer the Chief Minister to my comments in Tuesday night's adjournment debate in which I expressed concern about the government's decision to indemnify public officers and ministers for their costs as plaintiffs in defamation actions. Will the Chief Minister table the costs agreement with the plaintiff Dennis Hart in his current court action with the ABC?
Page 374
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I cannot give an undertaking to do that, at least not without seeking further advice. I recall having advised the member, following a letter that he wrote to me on this subject, of the government's attitude towards indemnifying the costs of public servants and ministers who are defamed or sued in the course of their duties. Our attitude is one that I understand is adopted by most, if not all, governments in Australia. If a public servant is defamed or sued in the course of their duties, taxpayers' funds are used either to defend them or to pursue justice. The government decides whether applications will or will not be supported on a case-by-case basis. Without exception, the arrangements are that, in the event of a successful conclusion to such a matter in the courts, taxpayers' funds will be reimbursed before any award is provided to the winner of the case. That seems to be a reasonable course of action. In my view, we are not doing anything that other governments do not do.
Governments have a responsibility to public servants. Police officers are a good example because they are very much in the firing line in many cases and have the potential to become involved in disputed circumstances. That area is ripe for legal action to be taken in respect of false arrests etc. The government is prepared to support the public service. Not very many requests for support arise, but we accept our responsibility in this regard on a case-by-case basis.
Page 375
Page 374
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I cannot give an undertaking to do that, at least not without seeking further advice. I recall having advised the member, following a letter that he wrote to me on this subject, of the government's attitude towards indemnifying the costs of public servants and ministers who are defamed or sued in the course of their duties. Our attitude is one that I understand is adopted by most, if not all, governments in Australia. If a public servant is defamed or sued in the course of their duties, taxpayers' funds are used either to defend them or to pursue justice. The government decides whether applications will or will not be supported on a case-by-case basis. Without exception, the arrangements are that, in the event of a successful conclusion to such a matter in the courts, taxpayers' funds will be reimbursed before any award is provided to the winner of the case. That seems to be a reasonable course of action. In my view, we are not doing anything that other governments do not do.
Governments have a responsibility to public servants. Police officers are a good example because they are very much in the firing line in many cases and have the potential to become involved in disputed circumstances. That area is ripe for legal action to be taken in respect of false arrests etc. The government is prepared to support the public service. Not very many requests for support arise, but we accept our responsibility in this regard on a case-by-case basis.
Page 375
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016