❓ Hon Michael Mischin questions the Minister for Industrial Relations regarding amendments to the Work Health and Safety Bill 2019, specifically concerning consultation with legal bodies and the timing of identifying inconsistencies with prosecution law.
AnsweredQoN 1201Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
WORK
HEALTH AND SAFETY BILL 2019 — CONSULTATION
1201. Hon MICHAEL MISCHIN to the minister representing the
Minister for Industrial Relations:
I
refer to the amendments to clauses 230, 231 and 232 of the Work Health and
Safety Bill 2019, which first appeared in Legislative Council
supplementary notice paper 155, issue 5, on 15 September 2020, and the
memorandum to members of Parliament explaining those amendments tabled on 20
October as paper 4503.
(1) When was the minister first
advised that those clauses needed amendment and by whom?
(2) When were each of the Director of Public
Prosecutions, the State Solicitor's Office and the Attorney General first consulted about those clauses?
(3) Given that
approval to print the bill would have been granted by cabinet before November
2019, why did it take so long to realise that
those clauses were inconsistent with Western Australian prosecution law and practice?
(4) What was the
source of the information in tabled paper 4503 that the Office of the Director
of Public Prosecutions could not carry out certain of the functions proposed by
clause 321 because it is already lacking in resources, and when was it
received?
HEALTH AND SAFETY BILL 2019 — CONSULTATION
1201. Hon MICHAEL MISCHIN to the minister representing the
Minister for Industrial Relations:
I
refer to the amendments to clauses 230, 231 and 232 of the Work Health and
Safety Bill 2019, which first appeared in Legislative Council
supplementary notice paper 155, issue 5, on 15 September 2020, and the
memorandum to members of Parliament explaining those amendments tabled on 20
October as paper 4503.
(1) When was the minister first
advised that those clauses needed amendment and by whom?
(2) When were each of the Director of Public
Prosecutions, the State Solicitor's Office and the Attorney General first consulted about those clauses?
(3) Given that
approval to print the bill would have been granted by cabinet before November
2019, why did it take so long to realise that
those clauses were inconsistent with Western Australian prosecution law and practice?
(4) What was the
source of the information in tabled paper 4503 that the Office of the Director
of Public Prosecutions could not carry out certain of the functions proposed by
clause 321 because it is already lacking in resources, and when was it
received?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the
question. The following information has been provided by the Minister for Mines
and Petroleum; Industrial Relations.
(1)–(3) I refer the member
to Legislative Council question without notice 1160, answers (1) to (5).
(4) The paper was prepared in
consultation with the Attorney General's office.
question. The following information has been provided by the Minister for Mines
and Petroleum; Industrial Relations.
(1)–(3) I refer the member
to Legislative Council question without notice 1160, answers (1) to (5).
(4) The paper was prepared in
consultation with the Attorney General's office.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.