❓ Question on Notice regarding mandatory sentencing for assaults on public transport workers. Minister avoids direct commitment, citing broader implications and defers to Attorney General on election commitments.
AnsweredQoN 195Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
TRANSPORT — ASSAULTS ON PUBLIC OFFICERS
I refer to the 143 public officers who were assaulted across all metropolitan train lines last year, and the minister’s previous strong support for providing protection from assault for bus drivers and taxidrivers. (1) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against public officers working on our train lines? (2) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against bus drivers? (3) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers? (4) If no to the above questions, why not? (5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
I refer to the 143 public officers who were assaulted across all metropolitan train lines last year, and the minister’s previous strong support for providing protection from assault for bus drivers and taxidrivers. (1) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against public officers working on our train lines? (2) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against bus drivers? (3) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers? (4) If no to the above questions, why not? (5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(1) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against public officers working on our train lines? (2) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against bus drivers? (3) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers? (4) If no to the above questions, why not? (5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(2) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against bus drivers? (3) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers? (4) If no to the above questions, why not? (5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(3) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers? (4) If no to the above questions, why not? (5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(4) If no to the above questions, why not? (5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
The PRESIDENT : No.
(1) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against public officers working on our train lines? (2) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against bus drivers? (3) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers? (4) If no to the above questions, why not? (5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(2) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against bus drivers? (3) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers? (4) If no to the above questions, why not? (5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(3) Does the minister support mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers? (4) If no to the above questions, why not? (5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(4) If no to the above questions, why not? (5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(5) If yes, can the minister assure the public that the Liberal-National government will honour its election commitment and provide mandatory sentencing for assaults against these very important public officers; and, if not, why not? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
(1)-(5) I have just been provided a copy of the question. Addressing (5) first, I commence by advising the honourable member that public comment on these matters about the future legislative changes, or whatever it is he is referring to, should be directed to the Attorney General, not the Minister for Transport. Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Kim Chance : That is so he can tell you he is going to break his promise! Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ken Travers : You don’t care about them? The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
The PRESIDENT : Order, members! If members ask a question, they should at least have the courtesy to allow the person whom they have asked the question of to have the opportunity to respond. I know some members who have been here for a long time may think it is funny, but members of Parliament should behave in a proper way. It seems to me that some members are not doing so at the moment. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Parts (1)-(3) are about mandatory sentencing for assaults against public offices working on our train lines. I am not exactly sure what is meant by public offices working on our — Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ken Travers : I refer to security guards, revenue protection officers and the like. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That is fine. Various legislation contains definitions of “public officers”, but I understand what the member is saying. The question refers, secondly, to mandatory sentences for assaults against bus drivers, and, thirdly, to mandatory sentencing for assaults against taxidrivers. I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
I thank the member for acknowledging in his introductory remarks my strong support for providing protection to bus drivers and taxidrivers. It is a strongly held view on my part. I publicly encouraged an advertising campaign just before Christmas to get the message out there that our taxidrivers and bus drivers and other public transport employees are not punching bags and that it is not fair game for people to assault them in any way. The member recognises my views in that regard. The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
The member’s key point revolves around the question of mandatory sentencing. I want to see sentencing that is appropriate to the offence. I am sick of seeing people thumb their noses at authority and behave in an antisocial manner on our public transport system, and then get off with the proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, which is the appropriate cliché to use in this case. I want to see people dealt with appropriately. However, the question of mandatory sentencing opens up a whole range of other implications of which the member is no doubt aware. I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
I conclude my answer by saying that I hope the member does not see that reservations about mandatory sentencing for assaults on these officers — Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ken Travers : Do you accept that your election commitment was for mandatory sentencing? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hang on; hang on a minute. If the member wishes to beat this up politically — Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich : I can’t wait! Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : —that is a matter for him, and, as Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich says, she “can’t wait”. I want to provide real protections for people. Part of the debate about mandatory sentencing, which I want to see applied to police officers, is not considered in the member’s question; namely, where do we draw the line? Could a case not also be made for mandatory sentencing for assaults on nurses — Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ken Travers : Absolutely. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : — and on people working in hospital emergency rooms; on the person in the kiosk at the train station; on the innocent mum pushing a stroller and baby down the street; or on the proverbial little old lady or frail aged person living alone who is burgled? Where is the line drawn? Are we going to have mandatory sentencing because those people are all just as vulnerable as the categories mentioned in the member’s question? Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
Hon Ken Travers : Will you take an interjection? The PRESIDENT : No.
The PRESIDENT : No.
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.