❓ Minister Roberts defends the government's response to a 2001 report on Supreme Court security, highlighting immediate actions taken, including plans for a new court complex and immediate upgrades, while shifting blame to the previous government and AIMS Corporation for potential failures.
AnsweredQoN 322Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to her admission that prior to last week’s mass escape of nine dangerous detainees from Supreme Court custody she had not seen the 2001 report of the Inspector of Custodial Services, which warned that arrangements for the Supreme Court were “urgent priorities that simply cannot be deferred much longer”. (1) Will the minister explain why, nearly three years after the inspection, there was no appreciable improvement in court custody security at the Supreme Court, despite calls for immediate and urgent action? (2) Given that the minister has admitted that concerns regarding the court’s security date back several years, does the minister concede that her lack of knowledge of this report over a year after taking responsibility for the justice portfolio amounts to gross negligence? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for Nedlands for that question because it gives me an opportunity to respond to those criticisms. (1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
(1) Will the minister explain why, nearly three years after the inspection, there was no appreciable improvement in court custody security at the Supreme Court, despite calls for immediate and urgent action? (2) Given that the minister has admitted that concerns regarding the court’s security date back several years, does the minister concede that her lack of knowledge of this report over a year after taking responsibility for the justice portfolio amounts to gross negligence? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: I thank the member for Nedlands for that question because it gives me an opportunity to respond to those criticisms. (1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
(2) Given that the minister has admitted that concerns regarding the court’s security date back several years, does the minister concede that her lack of knowledge of this report over a year after taking responsibility for the justice portfolio amounts to gross negligence? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: I thank the member for Nedlands for that question because it gives me an opportunity to respond to those criticisms. (1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: I thank the member for Nedlands for that question because it gives me an opportunity to respond to those criticisms. (1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
I thank the member for Nedlands for that question because it gives me an opportunity to respond to those criticisms. (1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
(1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
(1) Will the minister explain why, nearly three years after the inspection, there was no appreciable improvement in court custody security at the Supreme Court, despite calls for immediate and urgent action? (2) Given that the minister has admitted that concerns regarding the court’s security date back several years, does the minister concede that her lack of knowledge of this report over a year after taking responsibility for the justice portfolio amounts to gross negligence? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: I thank the member for Nedlands for that question because it gives me an opportunity to respond to those criticisms. (1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
(2) Given that the minister has admitted that concerns regarding the court’s security date back several years, does the minister concede that her lack of knowledge of this report over a year after taking responsibility for the justice portfolio amounts to gross negligence? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: I thank the member for Nedlands for that question because it gives me an opportunity to respond to those criticisms. (1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: I thank the member for Nedlands for that question because it gives me an opportunity to respond to those criticisms. (1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
I thank the member for Nedlands for that question because it gives me an opportunity to respond to those criticisms. (1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
(1)-(2) The fact of the matter is that the report that the inspector did at the end of 2001 was tabled in this House in June 2002. There is a record of our Government immediately acting upon that. What we did to respond, which is what members opposite - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: What a nonsense! The Attorney General also had responsibility for the justice portfolio at the time. He not only read the report but also acted on it. Our whole Government acted upon that report. Unlike members opposite who had been putting up with the same criticisms for years, he launched an action plan to address the problem - not a quick-fix, patch-up solution, but a real long-term solution committing more than $100 million to build a whole new court complex so that criminal trials at the Supreme Court would no longer take place there but at a new, secure complex. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: I do find the member for Nedlands’ interjection that I am not telling the truth both unparliamentary and objectionable. The fact of the matter is that criminal trials at the Supreme Court are to be transferred to the new complex. That is what this is substantially about. Our Government took action after more than 10 years of inaction. Not only that; we moved immediately - Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the first time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: In dealing with the issue of the physical environment that was highlighted by the inspector, we immediately moved in the next budget round to put more than $100 million on budget to build a whole new court complex. In addition, we put further money on budget to make some immediate changes to the Supreme Court. In fact, $4.2 million was put on budget. More than $1 million of that was tagged for the cell improvement area. A variety of people, including officers of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services, have been part of an implementation committee to upgrade that security. The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
The fact of the matter is that a lot of people opposite want to jump to conclusions about what occurred the other day. I am interested in ensuring that we look at what went wrong in context and deal with those issues so that we can avoid any repetition in the future. If - this is an “if”, because there is no final report yet - the failures that have been highlighted as possible failures by AIMS Corporation Pty Ltd occurred - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Warren-Blackwood to order, and I call the member for Kalgoorlie to order for the second time. Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS: If failures of the kind that have been noted, and potentially more, have occurred, AIMS has a lot to answer for, as does the Department of Justice in monitoring the situation. The fact of the matter is that the former Government entered into the contract. The former Government and AIMS knew the physical environment in which they were committed to protecting prisoners. Systems should have been in place to ensure that the physical environment of the cells that people were in was catered for. These were all known factors. It might well be that when we get the final report, we find that the physical environment was not the issue. However, in so far as the action of this Government, this Government acted immediately upon the report. We have moved to put a new court complex in place, and we have moved so that at the earliest opportunity we can address the issues in the cell area of the court.
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.