❓ Ms. Mettam questions the Premier about the rationale for not requiring life jackets, particularly concerning children and the infirm. The Premier defends the government's consultation process and actions taken in high-risk areas.
AnsweredQoN 1048Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
LIFE JACKETS
1048. Ms L. METTAM to the Premier:
I have a supplementary question.
Can the Premier confirm that the basis for not requiring the carriage of life
jackets is because the average person can swim 400 metres to shore; and, if so,
does the government expect a young child or the infirm to swim that distance,
as outlined in the government's position statement?
1048. Ms L. METTAM to the Premier:
I have a supplementary question.
Can the Premier confirm that the basis for not requiring the carriage of life
jackets is because the average person can swim 400 metres to shore; and, if so,
does the government expect a young child or the infirm to swim that distance,
as outlined in the government's position statement?
AnswerView source ↗
You do not listen to —
Ms L. Mettam : You don't
read.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Vasse, I call you to order for the second time.
Mr M. McGOWAN : That is very
nasty—very, very nasty.
Mr M.P. Murray interjected.
The SPEAKER : Minister for
Seniors and Ageing, I call you to order for the first time.
Mr M. McGOWAN : I will
explain it to the member again. In 2015, the coroner made a range of
recommendations . No action took place between 2015 and 2017. This
government is currently running a consultation process on these matters—that
is the process that is currently going on. I repeat to the member: if someone's
boat is tied up to a mooring 50 or 100 metres off the coast and they come in to
the Rottnest pub, the Palm Beach Cafe or down in Dunsborough—wherever
it might be—there are arguments about whether people are required to
wear a life jacket in those circumstances because of the closeness to the
shore. I am advised that currently, up to 400 metres, there is no requirement.
We are consulting about whether there should be a requirement. As I outlined to
the house yesterday, when my children go on a
boat with the next-door neighbour sometimes on a Saturday or Sunday morning, I insist
that they wear a life jacket. I certainly think, in the case of children, it
should be more stringent than for adults. But I repeat: some people say that
people should have to wear a life jacket when they are crabbing in the Mandurah
estuary. I personally do not agree with that. There are all sorts of arguments
and all sorts of things that are involved in sorting this issue out, and that
is why we are consulting the public. But when it comes to safety on the ocean,
I remind members that we are the government that has made it a requirement, for
instance, to wear life jackets down at Salmon Holes, because people are
drowning there. No action was ever taken before in relation to that. We have
taken action on that. We are trialling it there and looking at where else that
may be rolled out in order to save lives. Let us not scaremonger; let us just
listen to the community and come up with the best outcome.
The SPEAKER : That is the end of question time.
Ms L. Mettam : You don't
read.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Vasse, I call you to order for the second time.
Mr M. McGOWAN : That is very
nasty—very, very nasty.
Mr M.P. Murray interjected.
The SPEAKER : Minister for
Seniors and Ageing, I call you to order for the first time.
Mr M. McGOWAN : I will
explain it to the member again. In 2015, the coroner made a range of
recommendations . No action took place between 2015 and 2017. This
government is currently running a consultation process on these matters—that
is the process that is currently going on. I repeat to the member: if someone's
boat is tied up to a mooring 50 or 100 metres off the coast and they come in to
the Rottnest pub, the Palm Beach Cafe or down in Dunsborough—wherever
it might be—there are arguments about whether people are required to
wear a life jacket in those circumstances because of the closeness to the
shore. I am advised that currently, up to 400 metres, there is no requirement.
We are consulting about whether there should be a requirement. As I outlined to
the house yesterday, when my children go on a
boat with the next-door neighbour sometimes on a Saturday or Sunday morning, I insist
that they wear a life jacket. I certainly think, in the case of children, it
should be more stringent than for adults. But I repeat: some people say that
people should have to wear a life jacket when they are crabbing in the Mandurah
estuary. I personally do not agree with that. There are all sorts of arguments
and all sorts of things that are involved in sorting this issue out, and that
is why we are consulting the public. But when it comes to safety on the ocean,
I remind members that we are the government that has made it a requirement, for
instance, to wear life jackets down at Salmon Holes, because people are
drowning there. No action was ever taken before in relation to that. We have
taken action on that. We are trialling it there and looking at where else that
may be rolled out in order to save lives. Let us not scaremonger; let us just
listen to the community and come up with the best outcome.
The SPEAKER : That is the end of question 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.