❓ The Attorney General, responding to a question about the Opposition's Criminal Code Amendment (Protection of Seniors) Bill 2000, argues that it won't effectively increase jail sentences for criminals preying on seniors and criticises the Opposition for not supporting the government's sentencing matrix legislation.
AnsweredQoN 191Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Has the minister considered the Opposition’s Criminal Code Amendment (Protection of Seniors) Bill 2000? (2) If so, does this Bill mean that criminals who prey on older Western Australians will face longer jail sentences as claimed by the Leader of the Opposition? Mr PRINCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have a response from the Attorney General. (1)-(2) The Criminal Code (Protection of Seniors) Bill apparently seeks to increase the statutory maximum penalties for some offences against the elderly. The reality is that the Bill will not do what it purports to do. It will have little or no impact on the sentencing practices of judges. The statistics produced by the Ministry of Justice on the imprisonment penalties for serious offences in the Superior Court for 1998-99 highlights that actual sentencing practices are virtually oblivious of statutory maximums. For example, the maximum penalty for robbery while armed is 22 years’ imprisonment. The average sentence imposed during the 1998-99 period was just over four years. The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 20 years. The figures show the average sentence is less than two years. The maximum penalty for home burglary is 18 years and the average sentence is less than two years. Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
(2) If so, does this Bill mean that criminals who prey on older Western Australians will face longer jail sentences as claimed by the Leader of the Opposition? Mr PRINCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have a response from the Attorney General. (1)-(2) The Criminal Code (Protection of Seniors) Bill apparently seeks to increase the statutory maximum penalties for some offences against the elderly. The reality is that the Bill will not do what it purports to do. It will have little or no impact on the sentencing practices of judges. The statistics produced by the Ministry of Justice on the imprisonment penalties for serious offences in the Superior Court for 1998-99 highlights that actual sentencing practices are virtually oblivious of statutory maximums. For example, the maximum penalty for robbery while armed is 22 years’ imprisonment. The average sentence imposed during the 1998-99 period was just over four years. The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 20 years. The figures show the average sentence is less than two years. The maximum penalty for home burglary is 18 years and the average sentence is less than two years. Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Mr PRINCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have a response from the Attorney General. (1)-(2) The Criminal Code (Protection of Seniors) Bill apparently seeks to increase the statutory maximum penalties for some offences against the elderly. The reality is that the Bill will not do what it purports to do. It will have little or no impact on the sentencing practices of judges. The statistics produced by the Ministry of Justice on the imprisonment penalties for serious offences in the Superior Court for 1998-99 highlights that actual sentencing practices are virtually oblivious of statutory maximums. For example, the maximum penalty for robbery while armed is 22 years’ imprisonment. The average sentence imposed during the 1998-99 period was just over four years. The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 20 years. The figures show the average sentence is less than two years. The maximum penalty for home burglary is 18 years and the average sentence is less than two years. Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have a response from the Attorney General. (1)-(2) The Criminal Code (Protection of Seniors) Bill apparently seeks to increase the statutory maximum penalties for some offences against the elderly. The reality is that the Bill will not do what it purports to do. It will have little or no impact on the sentencing practices of judges. The statistics produced by the Ministry of Justice on the imprisonment penalties for serious offences in the Superior Court for 1998-99 highlights that actual sentencing practices are virtually oblivious of statutory maximums. For example, the maximum penalty for robbery while armed is 22 years’ imprisonment. The average sentence imposed during the 1998-99 period was just over four years. The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 20 years. The figures show the average sentence is less than two years. The maximum penalty for home burglary is 18 years and the average sentence is less than two years. Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
(1)-(2) The Criminal Code (Protection of Seniors) Bill apparently seeks to increase the statutory maximum penalties for some offences against the elderly. The reality is that the Bill will not do what it purports to do. It will have little or no impact on the sentencing practices of judges. The statistics produced by the Ministry of Justice on the imprisonment penalties for serious offences in the Superior Court for 1998-99 highlights that actual sentencing practices are virtually oblivious of statutory maximums. For example, the maximum penalty for robbery while armed is 22 years’ imprisonment. The average sentence imposed during the 1998-99 period was just over four years. The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 20 years. The figures show the average sentence is less than two years. The maximum penalty for home burglary is 18 years and the average sentence is less than two years. Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
[The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
(2) If so, does this Bill mean that criminals who prey on older Western Australians will face longer jail sentences as claimed by the Leader of the Opposition? Mr PRINCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have a response from the Attorney General. (1)-(2) The Criminal Code (Protection of Seniors) Bill apparently seeks to increase the statutory maximum penalties for some offences against the elderly. The reality is that the Bill will not do what it purports to do. It will have little or no impact on the sentencing practices of judges. The statistics produced by the Ministry of Justice on the imprisonment penalties for serious offences in the Superior Court for 1998-99 highlights that actual sentencing practices are virtually oblivious of statutory maximums. For example, the maximum penalty for robbery while armed is 22 years’ imprisonment. The average sentence imposed during the 1998-99 period was just over four years. The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 20 years. The figures show the average sentence is less than two years. The maximum penalty for home burglary is 18 years and the average sentence is less than two years. Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Mr PRINCE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have a response from the Attorney General. (1)-(2) The Criminal Code (Protection of Seniors) Bill apparently seeks to increase the statutory maximum penalties for some offences against the elderly. The reality is that the Bill will not do what it purports to do. It will have little or no impact on the sentencing practices of judges. The statistics produced by the Ministry of Justice on the imprisonment penalties for serious offences in the Superior Court for 1998-99 highlights that actual sentencing practices are virtually oblivious of statutory maximums. For example, the maximum penalty for robbery while armed is 22 years’ imprisonment. The average sentence imposed during the 1998-99 period was just over four years. The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 20 years. The figures show the average sentence is less than two years. The maximum penalty for home burglary is 18 years and the average sentence is less than two years. Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I have a response from the Attorney General. (1)-(2) The Criminal Code (Protection of Seniors) Bill apparently seeks to increase the statutory maximum penalties for some offences against the elderly. The reality is that the Bill will not do what it purports to do. It will have little or no impact on the sentencing practices of judges. The statistics produced by the Ministry of Justice on the imprisonment penalties for serious offences in the Superior Court for 1998-99 highlights that actual sentencing practices are virtually oblivious of statutory maximums. For example, the maximum penalty for robbery while armed is 22 years’ imprisonment. The average sentence imposed during the 1998-99 period was just over four years. The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 20 years. The figures show the average sentence is less than two years. The maximum penalty for home burglary is 18 years and the average sentence is less than two years. Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
(1)-(2) The Criminal Code (Protection of Seniors) Bill apparently seeks to increase the statutory maximum penalties for some offences against the elderly. The reality is that the Bill will not do what it purports to do. It will have little or no impact on the sentencing practices of judges. The statistics produced by the Ministry of Justice on the imprisonment penalties for serious offences in the Superior Court for 1998-99 highlights that actual sentencing practices are virtually oblivious of statutory maximums. For example, the maximum penalty for robbery while armed is 22 years’ imprisonment. The average sentence imposed during the 1998-99 period was just over four years. The maximum penalty for aggravated burglary is 20 years. The figures show the average sentence is less than two years. The maximum penalty for home burglary is 18 years and the average sentence is less than two years. Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Several members interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Fremantle to order. Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Mr PRINCE: Serious assault carries a maximum penalty of 10 years but the average sentence is less than two years. I table the penalties statistics. [The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
[The paper was tabled for the information of members.] Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Mr PRINCE: I have multiple copies of the statistics so that interested members may obtain a copy. Instead of trying to pass legislation that seems to increase maximum penalties that are not imposed by the courts, and that seem to have very little, if any, effect upon the sentencing practices of the courts, the Opposition needs to support the Government’s sentencing matrix legislation. It should not try to con people that it is tough on crime. The matrix legislation will give Parliament control over the range of sentences imposed by the courts, particularly for offences that are seen to be an aggravation to the community. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to order. Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Mr PRINCE: The range of sentences imposed by the courts, especially for offences seen as aggravating by the community, will be able to be increased by this Parliament under the matrix legislation. The Sentencing Matrix Bill has been languishing in the other House for months because of the total lack of ability of the Opposition to deal with its concepts. The matrix legislation will enable this Parliament to ensure that the legislation put into effect in providing for maximum penalties for offences that are particularly aggravating to the people of this State are able to be imposed. The Bill that the Opposition is introducing will do nothing of the sort; it will have no effect as it is an absolute con. It is another stunt. The legislation in the Legislative Council will achieve the required end. It has sat in the Council for months and months and been hived off to committees. There has been no progress because the Opposition, for reasons known only to itself, does not want to have the ability to impose some form of discipline upon the judiciary in imposing sentences for what the people see as being essential and necessary. Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Dr Gallop interjected. THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
THE DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
Mr PRINCE: The Bill is a stunt and it will not work. The statistics prove it will not work. The matrix legislation will work and the Opposition should support it.
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.