❓ Hon. Nick Goiran questions the Attorney General regarding an alleged assurance from the Chief Magistrate about bail for offenders subject to mandatory GPS tracking, following a media report. The answer confirms a discussion but avoids confirming the specific assurance.
AnsweredQoN 133Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Bail—GPS tracking device—Chief
Magistrate advice
133. Hon Nick Goiran to
the parliamentary secretary representing the
Attorney General:
I refer to your
answer to my question without notice on 29 April 2025 regarding the statement
published in The West Australian on 15
April 2025, in which a government spokeswoman claimed that the Attorney General
received an assurance from Chief Magistrate Heath that alleged offenders
captured by new mandatory GPS tracking laws would not be granted bail if deemed
a risk to the victim or community.
(1) Was
such an assurance given in the telephone conversation between the Attorney
General and the Chief Magistrate on 15 April 2025?
(2) If not,
who was the government spokeswoman who provided the information that led to the
false publication in the media that same day?
Magistrate advice
133. Hon Nick Goiran to
the parliamentary secretary representing the
Attorney General:
I refer to your
answer to my question without notice on 29 April 2025 regarding the statement
published in The West Australian on 15
April 2025, in which a government spokeswoman claimed that the Attorney General
received an assurance from Chief Magistrate Heath that alleged offenders
captured by new mandatory GPS tracking laws would not be granted bail if deemed
a risk to the victim or community.
(1) Was
such an assurance given in the telephone conversation between the Attorney
General and the Chief Magistrate on 15 April 2025?
(2) If not,
who was the government spokeswoman who provided the information that led to the
false publication in the media that same day?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the
member for some notice of the question.
(1)–(2)
The application of the Bail Act 1982 to
family violence offenders who are subject to mandatory electronic monitoring
was discussed, and there was concurrence that the existing requirements of the Bail Act 1982 continue to apply to the relevant
accused.
member for some notice of the question.
(1)–(2)
The application of the Bail Act 1982 to
family violence offenders who are subject to mandatory electronic monitoring
was discussed, and there was concurrence that the existing requirements of the Bail Act 1982 continue to apply to the relevant
accused.
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.