❓ Debate over Opposition's proposed policing policies, with the Minister accusing them of undermining reforms and overstepping operational boundaries. Heated exchange with interjections and Speaker interventions.
AnsweredQoN 251Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
In the past few weeks the Opposition has indicated, by its own statements, that it will directly involve itself in operational matters of the Police Service. Is the minister concerned with this direction and was this apparent in Labor’s document, received by him for comment? Mr PRINCE
AnswerView source ↗
I am delighted the member has asked that question. It follows on well from the last one. On page 2 of the Labor Party draft policy, it is stated that the Labor Party will retain the child abuse unit, re-establish the sexual assault squad, re-establish the Asian squad, possibly establish a traffic branch, re-establish the motor dealers’ unit, evaluate the need for a juvenile unit within the Police Service, and review the administrative areas of the service to get more police out on the front line and ensure that stations are effectively managing their budget. That means that the Opposition will use its vast policing experience to override the Commissioner of Police. The Opposition will dismantle the benchmark Delta reform program that the Government put into place some four or five years ago. The Delta reform program covers a raft of reforms and has been universally recognised as being the best method and leading system for the reformation of a Police Service in the Western world. It is said to be so by Professor Timothy Rohl of the Australian Institute of Police Management. When he travels internationally, he uses it as an example. More recently, he has been engaged as an adviser to Mr Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary. Professor Rohl has been extolling the virtues of the program to the Home Secretary. The Opposition wants to undo it. The Opposition has no idea what it would succeed in doing. The Opposition seeks to return the Police Service to a centrally-driven, internally-focused organisation that would not effectively use its resources or information. Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Mr PRINCE replied: I am delighted the member has asked that question. It follows on well from the last one. On page 2 of the Labor Party draft policy, it is stated that the Labor Party will retain the child abuse unit, re-establish the sexual assault squad, re-establish the Asian squad, possibly establish a traffic branch, re-establish the motor dealers’ unit, evaluate the need for a juvenile unit within the Police Service, and review the administrative areas of the service to get more police out on the front line and ensure that stations are effectively managing their budget. That means that the Opposition will use its vast policing experience to override the Commissioner of Police. The Opposition will dismantle the benchmark Delta reform program that the Government put into place some four or five years ago. The Delta reform program covers a raft of reforms and has been universally recognised as being the best method and leading system for the reformation of a Police Service in the Western world. It is said to be so by Professor Timothy Rohl of the Australian Institute of Police Management. When he travels internationally, he uses it as an example. More recently, he has been engaged as an adviser to Mr Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary. Professor Rohl has been extolling the virtues of the program to the Home Secretary. The Opposition wants to undo it. The Opposition has no idea what it would succeed in doing. The Opposition seeks to return the Police Service to a centrally-driven, internally-focused organisation that would not effectively use its resources or information. Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
I am delighted the member has asked that question. It follows on well from the last one. On page 2 of the Labor Party draft policy, it is stated that the Labor Party will retain the child abuse unit, re-establish the sexual assault squad, re-establish the Asian squad, possibly establish a traffic branch, re-establish the motor dealers’ unit, evaluate the need for a juvenile unit within the Police Service, and review the administrative areas of the service to get more police out on the front line and ensure that stations are effectively managing their budget. That means that the Opposition will use its vast policing experience to override the Commissioner of Police. The Opposition will dismantle the benchmark Delta reform program that the Government put into place some four or five years ago. The Delta reform program covers a raft of reforms and has been universally recognised as being the best method and leading system for the reformation of a Police Service in the Western world. It is said to be so by Professor Timothy Rohl of the Australian Institute of Police Management. When he travels internationally, he uses it as an example. More recently, he has been engaged as an adviser to Mr Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary. Professor Rohl has been extolling the virtues of the program to the Home Secretary. The Opposition wants to undo it. The Opposition has no idea what it would succeed in doing. The Opposition seeks to return the Police Service to a centrally-driven, internally-focused organisation that would not effectively use its resources or information. Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
On page 2 of the Labor Party draft policy, it is stated that the Labor Party will retain the child abuse unit, re-establish the sexual assault squad, re-establish the Asian squad, possibly establish a traffic branch, re-establish the motor dealers’ unit, evaluate the need for a juvenile unit within the Police Service, and review the administrative areas of the service to get more police out on the front line and ensure that stations are effectively managing their budget. That means that the Opposition will use its vast policing experience to override the Commissioner of Police. The Opposition will dismantle the benchmark Delta reform program that the Government put into place some four or five years ago. The Delta reform program covers a raft of reforms and has been universally recognised as being the best method and leading system for the reformation of a Police Service in the Western world. It is said to be so by Professor Timothy Rohl of the Australian Institute of Police Management. When he travels internationally, he uses it as an example. More recently, he has been engaged as an adviser to Mr Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary. Professor Rohl has been extolling the virtues of the program to the Home Secretary. The Opposition wants to undo it. The Opposition has no idea what it would succeed in doing. The Opposition seeks to return the Police Service to a centrally-driven, internally-focused organisation that would not effectively use its resources or information. Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
That means that the Opposition will use its vast policing experience to override the Commissioner of Police. The Opposition will dismantle the benchmark Delta reform program that the Government put into place some four or five years ago. The Delta reform program covers a raft of reforms and has been universally recognised as being the best method and leading system for the reformation of a Police Service in the Western world. It is said to be so by Professor Timothy Rohl of the Australian Institute of Police Management. When he travels internationally, he uses it as an example. More recently, he has been engaged as an adviser to Mr Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary. Professor Rohl has been extolling the virtues of the program to the Home Secretary. The Opposition wants to undo it. The Opposition has no idea what it would succeed in doing. The Opposition seeks to return the Police Service to a centrally-driven, internally-focused organisation that would not effectively use its resources or information. Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
. . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
. . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Mr PRINCE replied: I am delighted the member has asked that question. It follows on well from the last one. On page 2 of the Labor Party draft policy, it is stated that the Labor Party will retain the child abuse unit, re-establish the sexual assault squad, re-establish the Asian squad, possibly establish a traffic branch, re-establish the motor dealers’ unit, evaluate the need for a juvenile unit within the Police Service, and review the administrative areas of the service to get more police out on the front line and ensure that stations are effectively managing their budget. That means that the Opposition will use its vast policing experience to override the Commissioner of Police. The Opposition will dismantle the benchmark Delta reform program that the Government put into place some four or five years ago. The Delta reform program covers a raft of reforms and has been universally recognised as being the best method and leading system for the reformation of a Police Service in the Western world. It is said to be so by Professor Timothy Rohl of the Australian Institute of Police Management. When he travels internationally, he uses it as an example. More recently, he has been engaged as an adviser to Mr Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary. Professor Rohl has been extolling the virtues of the program to the Home Secretary. The Opposition wants to undo it. The Opposition has no idea what it would succeed in doing. The Opposition seeks to return the Police Service to a centrally-driven, internally-focused organisation that would not effectively use its resources or information. Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
I am delighted the member has asked that question. It follows on well from the last one. On page 2 of the Labor Party draft policy, it is stated that the Labor Party will retain the child abuse unit, re-establish the sexual assault squad, re-establish the Asian squad, possibly establish a traffic branch, re-establish the motor dealers’ unit, evaluate the need for a juvenile unit within the Police Service, and review the administrative areas of the service to get more police out on the front line and ensure that stations are effectively managing their budget. That means that the Opposition will use its vast policing experience to override the Commissioner of Police. The Opposition will dismantle the benchmark Delta reform program that the Government put into place some four or five years ago. The Delta reform program covers a raft of reforms and has been universally recognised as being the best method and leading system for the reformation of a Police Service in the Western world. It is said to be so by Professor Timothy Rohl of the Australian Institute of Police Management. When he travels internationally, he uses it as an example. More recently, he has been engaged as an adviser to Mr Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary. Professor Rohl has been extolling the virtues of the program to the Home Secretary. The Opposition wants to undo it. The Opposition has no idea what it would succeed in doing. The Opposition seeks to return the Police Service to a centrally-driven, internally-focused organisation that would not effectively use its resources or information. Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
On page 2 of the Labor Party draft policy, it is stated that the Labor Party will retain the child abuse unit, re-establish the sexual assault squad, re-establish the Asian squad, possibly establish a traffic branch, re-establish the motor dealers’ unit, evaluate the need for a juvenile unit within the Police Service, and review the administrative areas of the service to get more police out on the front line and ensure that stations are effectively managing their budget. That means that the Opposition will use its vast policing experience to override the Commissioner of Police. The Opposition will dismantle the benchmark Delta reform program that the Government put into place some four or five years ago. The Delta reform program covers a raft of reforms and has been universally recognised as being the best method and leading system for the reformation of a Police Service in the Western world. It is said to be so by Professor Timothy Rohl of the Australian Institute of Police Management. When he travels internationally, he uses it as an example. More recently, he has been engaged as an adviser to Mr Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary. Professor Rohl has been extolling the virtues of the program to the Home Secretary. The Opposition wants to undo it. The Opposition has no idea what it would succeed in doing. The Opposition seeks to return the Police Service to a centrally-driven, internally-focused organisation that would not effectively use its resources or information. Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
That means that the Opposition will use its vast policing experience to override the Commissioner of Police. The Opposition will dismantle the benchmark Delta reform program that the Government put into place some four or five years ago. The Delta reform program covers a raft of reforms and has been universally recognised as being the best method and leading system for the reformation of a Police Service in the Western world. It is said to be so by Professor Timothy Rohl of the Australian Institute of Police Management. When he travels internationally, he uses it as an example. More recently, he has been engaged as an adviser to Mr Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary. Professor Rohl has been extolling the virtues of the program to the Home Secretary. The Opposition wants to undo it. The Opposition has no idea what it would succeed in doing. The Opposition seeks to return the Police Service to a centrally-driven, internally-focused organisation that would not effectively use its resources or information. Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Dr Gallop: Did you get a political donation from Leon Jamieson? Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition should know that his comments have nothing to do with the question being asked. I formally call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Mr PRINCE: If you cannot take it, do not dish it out. Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Dr Gallop: How am I supposed to resist if he says something like that? Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Mr PRINCE: The Opposition's proposals will return the Police Service to the state it was in under the Labor administration when there was a high rate of increase in crime. It will go back to those levels if we ever have the misfortune to have another Labor Government. The Opposition should never have the power to force the Commissioner of Police to employ more police. Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Dr Gallop: You are an idiot! Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Mr PRINCE: The member should not be so complimentary! The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: Order! Members are not meant to impugn each other's reputations. I have let the word "dope" pass through to the keeper today. Perhaps that was a mistake. There are ways of expressing things that do not infer that a member is an idiot. I ask the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. Withdrawal of Remark Dr GALLOP: I withdraw the remark. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr PRINCE: The draft policy of the Opposition is trying to turn the world backwards. I am sure it is something that members of the union movement would like to see. The Opposition has also attacked the communications and technology project, which will cost more than $125m over the next few years. It will completely re-equip the technology and management of the Police Service. The Opposition's spokesman for Public Sector Management, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, has said - . . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
. . . community safety was being compromised so the police major projects unit could dabble in new technology which may or may not pay off. The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
The Oppsition should read section 5 of the Police Act, which states – . . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
. . . every Commissioner of Police shall be charged and vested with the general control and management of the Police Force of the said State . . . The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
The Opposition should also read what Hon Peter Dowding said in this Chamber 11 years ago. The Opposition has no idea about the separation of powers between operational and ministerial responsibility. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: Order! I formally called the member for Peel to order for the first time.
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.