❓ Opposition Leader Barnett questions Premier Gallop's handling of the Police Royal Commission report, accusing him of exaggerating findings and undermining police. Gallop defends his statements, emphasizing the need for reform and accusing the opposition of inaction.
AnsweredQoN 81Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the Premier to the half-page advertisement that Police Commissioner Barry Matthews placed in The West Australian today about the report of the Royal Commission Into Whether There Has Been Any Corrupt or Criminal Conduct by Western Australian Police Officers. It states in part - Unfortunately most people will never read the full 1053-page report and that’s why I am writing to put in perspective some misconceptions brought about by some early coverage of the Royal Commission report. (1) Is it not a sad indictment of the Premier of this State that the Commissioner of Police has had to come out in defiance of the Premier to support our police officers because the Premier has failed to do so? (2) Will the Premier admit that he was largely responsible for those misconceptions, especially as he grossly exaggerated the findings in the police royal commission report and, in doing so, misled the public of Western Australia? (3) Who is right - the Premier, who is attempting to recover political ground, or the Commissioner of Police, who is trying to do the right thing and restore public confidence in our policemen and policewomen in Western Australia? Dr G.I. GALLOP
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) I believe that I answered this question earlier. Obviously the Leader of the Opposition was a bit short on his hearing at that time. The one thing that the Commissioner of Police and I agree on is that the blueprint for reform outlined in the royal commission report must be implemented. He will get on with the job of doing that and the Government will get on with the job of doing that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
(2) Will the Premier admit that he was largely responsible for those misconceptions, especially as he grossly exaggerated the findings in the police royal commission report and, in doing so, misled the public of Western Australia? (3) Who is right - the Premier, who is attempting to recover political ground, or the Commissioner of Police, who is trying to do the right thing and restore public confidence in our policemen and policewomen in Western Australia? Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: (1)-(3) I believe that I answered this question earlier. Obviously the Leader of the Opposition was a bit short on his hearing at that time. The one thing that the Commissioner of Police and I agree on is that the blueprint for reform outlined in the royal commission report must be implemented. He will get on with the job of doing that and the Government will get on with the job of doing that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
(3) Who is right - the Premier, who is attempting to recover political ground, or the Commissioner of Police, who is trying to do the right thing and restore public confidence in our policemen and policewomen in Western Australia? Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: (1)-(3) I believe that I answered this question earlier. Obviously the Leader of the Opposition was a bit short on his hearing at that time. The one thing that the Commissioner of Police and I agree on is that the blueprint for reform outlined in the royal commission report must be implemented. He will get on with the job of doing that and the Government will get on with the job of doing that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: (1)-(3) I believe that I answered this question earlier. Obviously the Leader of the Opposition was a bit short on his hearing at that time. The one thing that the Commissioner of Police and I agree on is that the blueprint for reform outlined in the royal commission report must be implemented. He will get on with the job of doing that and the Government will get on with the job of doing that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
(1)-(3) I believe that I answered this question earlier. Obviously the Leader of the Opposition was a bit short on his hearing at that time. The one thing that the Commissioner of Police and I agree on is that the blueprint for reform outlined in the royal commission report must be implemented. He will get on with the job of doing that and the Government will get on with the job of doing that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
(2) Will the Premier admit that he was largely responsible for those misconceptions, especially as he grossly exaggerated the findings in the police royal commission report and, in doing so, misled the public of Western Australia? (3) Who is right - the Premier, who is attempting to recover political ground, or the Commissioner of Police, who is trying to do the right thing and restore public confidence in our policemen and policewomen in Western Australia? Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: (1)-(3) I believe that I answered this question earlier. Obviously the Leader of the Opposition was a bit short on his hearing at that time. The one thing that the Commissioner of Police and I agree on is that the blueprint for reform outlined in the royal commission report must be implemented. He will get on with the job of doing that and the Government will get on with the job of doing that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
(3) Who is right - the Premier, who is attempting to recover political ground, or the Commissioner of Police, who is trying to do the right thing and restore public confidence in our policemen and policewomen in Western Australia? Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: (1)-(3) I believe that I answered this question earlier. Obviously the Leader of the Opposition was a bit short on his hearing at that time. The one thing that the Commissioner of Police and I agree on is that the blueprint for reform outlined in the royal commission report must be implemented. He will get on with the job of doing that and the Government will get on with the job of doing that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
Dr G.I. GALLOP replied: (1)-(3) I believe that I answered this question earlier. Obviously the Leader of the Opposition was a bit short on his hearing at that time. The one thing that the Commissioner of Police and I agree on is that the blueprint for reform outlined in the royal commission report must be implemented. He will get on with the job of doing that and the Government will get on with the job of doing that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
(1)-(3) I believe that I answered this question earlier. Obviously the Leader of the Opposition was a bit short on his hearing at that time. The one thing that the Commissioner of Police and I agree on is that the blueprint for reform outlined in the royal commission report must be implemented. He will get on with the job of doing that and the Government will get on with the job of doing that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
Dr G.I. GALLOP: I remind the Opposition that the royal commission report states that the full range of corrupt or criminal conduct that has appeared in various findings throughout Australia in recent years also has appeared in Western Australia. It also states - . . . there remain in WAPS a number of officers who participated in this conduct, and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, . . . Further, the royal commission examined the activities of about 500 past and serving police officers. The report goes on to state - What is of more significance is the extent to which WAPS has been ineffective in monitoring those events and modifying its procedures in order to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. I make it very clear that the statement I read to the Parliament about the royal commission report was a very fair and reasonable statement based on the royal commission’s findings. It is very interesting that the Opposition has taken another view, but it does not surprise me because it was always opposed to the royal commission. It is like all the issues in Western Australian history: one party in politics tries to bring those issues to the surface, analyse them, investigate them and then do something about them, while another party always tries to sweep them under the carpet so that nothing is done about them. That is the approach of the Liberal Party in this State. As I said in my response earlier, I agree to disagree with the police commissioner on this. Both of us will get on with the job of implementing the recommendations of the royal commission.
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.