❓ Question concerns the Attorney General's knowledge of a corruption investigation into a Labor staffer, specifically regarding notification under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. The Attorney General admits to being notified of the phone tap but denies prior knowledge of the broader investigation.
AnsweredQoN 612Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the Attorney General to an article in The West Australian of yesterday revealing that he has been aware for two years that senior Labor staffer Graham Burkett was being investigated for corruption. (1) Will the Attorney General confirm that he was aware of the investigation of Mr Burkett? (2) Under what legislative authority was the Attorney General informed of the investigation of Mr Burkett? (3) Who informed the Attorney General and when was he informed of the investigation? Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
(1) Will the Attorney General confirm that he was aware of the investigation of Mr Burkett? (2) Under what legislative authority was the Attorney General informed of the investigation of Mr Burkett? (3) Who informed the Attorney General and when was he informed of the investigation? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
(2) Under what legislative authority was the Attorney General informed of the investigation of Mr Burkett? (3) Who informed the Attorney General and when was he informed of the investigation? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
(3) Who informed the Attorney General and when was he informed of the investigation? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
(1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
(1) Will the Attorney General confirm that he was aware of the investigation of Mr Burkett? (2) Under what legislative authority was the Attorney General informed of the investigation of Mr Burkett? (3) Who informed the Attorney General and when was he informed of the investigation? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
(2) Under what legislative authority was the Attorney General informed of the investigation of Mr Burkett? (3) Who informed the Attorney General and when was he informed of the investigation? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
(3) Who informed the Attorney General and when was he informed of the investigation? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
(1)-(3) The article by Luke Morfesse in yesterday’s The West Australian was generally accurate. I think he is a very good journalist, but the particulars of that article were not accurate. When Mr Morfesse rang me and asked whether I had been advised under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act of the phone tap on Mr Burkett I told him I would not confirm or deny that that had occurred but that it was obvious there was a statutory requirement on the Corruption and Crime Commission to notify the state Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers and that under section 7 of the Act I then had a duty to notify the federal Attorney General of the use of the phone tap powers. Obviously people comply with their statutory obligations. I did not confirm that. The article then indicated that I had known about it since 2002. As that matter now appears on the public record I will set the record straight. To the best of my knowledge, it was not 2002. Any government agency exercising telephone tap powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act 1996 is required to report that fact to the minister responsible for that agency. Ms S.E. Walker: Was it not under the CCC but the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act that you were informed? Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act provides that the chief officer of an eligible authority is to give to the responsible minister a copy of each warrant issued to the authority and for each instrument under section 52 or 57 of the commonwealth Act revoking such a warrant as soon as practicable after the issue or revocation of the warrant. I am to be advised of the exercise of the powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. I am then required, as I do, to write to the federal Attorney General and advise him and, generally speaking, enclose a copy of the warrant I receive. As I have indicated, I did not confirm anything to Mr Morfesse other than the fact that there was a statutory obligation to do that. He drew his own conclusion that I had been advised in 2002. It is true that I had been advised, but to the best of my recollection it was not in 2002; I was advised by the CCC this year that it had exercised those powers under the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: You haven’t said when. Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: It was earlier this year. Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Ms S.E. Walker: This is so important but you don’t have the date at your fingertips. Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. Mc Ginty : If the member for Nedlands wanted a date she should have given me some notice of that fact. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am regularly advised about the use of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
The SPEAKER: Order! Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am sorry to disappoint members opposite, but had I been given advice that they wished to know the precise date I would have happily brought it into the House. It was earlier this year. In the absence of knowing the precise date, that is the best advice I can give. Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
Who advised me? To the best of my recollection it was the CCC. When? Earlier this year. Under what legislative authority was I advised? Under section 6 of the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act. Can I confirm? The nature of the advice contained in the warrant simply indicates that the powers are being used. It does not indicate the subject matter of the powers in question. I was not aware that, beyond the telephone tap, Mr Burkett was subject to any investigation, or the nature or subject matter of that investigation. I first heard about it when I read about it in the media.
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.