❓ A WA parliamentary question reveals that an audit of government-subsidised immobilisers found a significant failure rate, prompting recalls and repairs. Follow-up actions and installer accountability are scrutinised.
AnsweredQoN 78Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the audit of immobilisers, which had been installed under the Government subsidy scheme, carried out for the WA Police Service in 1998 which found that 30% of immobilisers inspected needed to be recalled and repaired, and ask- (a) how many installers were asked to recall and repair immobilisers as a result of the findings of this audit; (b) how many immobilisers were repaired; (c) how many installers were removed from the Immobiliser Subsidy Scheme; and (d) was a further audit of those installers which were found to have failed an installation to determine the extent of sub-standard work carried out and if not, why not? Answered on 5 September 2000 The Minister
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
5 September 2000
Response time
27 days
The Insurance Council of Australia was responsible for overseeing the follow-up work required as a result of the audit process and has advised as follows: (a) 9 installers were asked to repair a total of 35 immobilisers following the audit. (b) 35. (c) None. (d) Yes.
(b) how many immobilisers were repaired; (c) how many installers were removed from the Immobiliser Subsidy Scheme; and (d) was a further audit of those installers which were found to have failed an installation to determine the extent of sub-standard work carried out and if not, why not?
(c) how many installers were removed from the Immobiliser Subsidy Scheme; and (d) was a further audit of those installers which were found to have failed an installation to determine the extent of sub-standard work carried out and if not, why not?
(d) was a further audit of those installers which were found to have failed an installation to determine the extent of sub-standard work carried out and if not, why not?
(b) how many immobilisers were repaired; (c) how many installers were removed from the Immobiliser Subsidy Scheme; and (d) was a further audit of those installers which were found to have failed an installation to determine the extent of sub-standard work carried out and if not, why not?
(c) how many installers were removed from the Immobiliser Subsidy Scheme; and (d) was a further audit of those installers which were found to have failed an installation to determine the extent of sub-standard work carried out and if not, why not?
(d) was a further audit of those installers which were found to have failed an installation to determine the extent of sub-standard work carried out and if not, why not?
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.