❓ Opposition questions the Premier regarding a large compensation payout to a public servant facing misconduct allegations, implying a lack of accountability. The Premier defends the payout as legally mandated and not government-determined.
AnsweredQoN 606Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
MR KEN BATES — COMPENSATION PAYMENT
I refer to the Public Sector Commissioner’s review of compensation paid to senior Director of Public Prosecutions prosecutor Ken Bates, and his finding that Mr Bates was paid the maximum amount of compensation available on termination of his employment. (1) Why was the maximum amount of compensation paid to a man who is facing disciplinary actions following serious findings of misconduct by the CCC? (2) Is this deal indicative of the new standard of accountability that we can expect from a public sector standards commissioner who is answerable to the Premier rather than answerable to the Parliament? (3) Does the Premier personally endorse this as a satisfactory outcome? Mr C.J. BARNETT
I refer to the Public Sector Commissioner’s review of compensation paid to senior Director of Public Prosecutions prosecutor Ken Bates, and his finding that Mr Bates was paid the maximum amount of compensation available on termination of his employment. (1) Why was the maximum amount of compensation paid to a man who is facing disciplinary actions following serious findings of misconduct by the CCC? (2) Is this deal indicative of the new standard of accountability that we can expect from a public sector standards commissioner who is answerable to the Premier rather than answerable to the Parliament? (3) Does the Premier personally endorse this as a satisfactory outcome? Mr C.J. BARNETT
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
(1) Why was the maximum amount of compensation paid to a man who is facing disciplinary actions following serious findings of misconduct by the CCC? (2) Is this deal indicative of the new standard of accountability that we can expect from a public sector standards commissioner who is answerable to the Premier rather than answerable to the Parliament? (3) Does the Premier personally endorse this as a satisfactory outcome? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
(2) Is this deal indicative of the new standard of accountability that we can expect from a public sector standards commissioner who is answerable to the Premier rather than answerable to the Parliament? (3) Does the Premier personally endorse this as a satisfactory outcome? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
(3) Does the Premier personally endorse this as a satisfactory outcome? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
(1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
(1) Why was the maximum amount of compensation paid to a man who is facing disciplinary actions following serious findings of misconduct by the CCC? (2) Is this deal indicative of the new standard of accountability that we can expect from a public sector standards commissioner who is answerable to the Premier rather than answerable to the Parliament? (3) Does the Premier personally endorse this as a satisfactory outcome? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
(2) Is this deal indicative of the new standard of accountability that we can expect from a public sector standards commissioner who is answerable to the Premier rather than answerable to the Parliament? (3) Does the Premier personally endorse this as a satisfactory outcome? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
(3) Does the Premier personally endorse this as a satisfactory outcome? Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr C.J. BARNETT replied: (1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
(1)-(3) No legislative change has occurred. The Commissioner for Public Sector Standards is still answerable to Parliament. Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr E.S. Ripper : What will happen in future? Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : The Leader of the Opposition is asking about something that happened recently. Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr E.S. Ripper : But what is your plan? Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : One way of getting the facts right is to get the sequence right. There has been no change to the legislation. The payout to Mr Bates was determined within the public sector; it was not determined by the government of the day. Had he stayed within the public service, he would have certainly faced disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act and through the Public Sector Commission. Was he facing criminal charges? I do not think so. The Leader of the Opposition should not confuse the two or create a sense of confusion around that. Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr E.S. Ripper : Did I mention the word “criminal”? Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : No, but the implication and the way the story runs in the media is that perhaps he was to be charged. That is the sort of connotation that is out there. That is not the case; he would have faced disciplinary procedures had he stayed in the public service. Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr J.R. Quigley : You don’t know that. Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : Okay, it is an assumption. However, to the best of anyone’s knowledge there would have been disciplinary procedures under the Public Sector Management Act, not criminal charges. Mr Bates received a payout on his contract and in addition he received his accumulated entitlements, leave and the like. That is what he was paid. Yes, it is a large sum of money but that is what he was legally entitled to.
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.