❓ Mr. Papalia questions the Minister for Corrective Services about a risk analysis conducted before the closure of Rangeview Remand Centre in 2009. The Minister deflects, stating he wasn't in the role at the time and refers to a report highlighting departmental failures.
AnsweredQoN 381Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
JUVENILE
DETAINEES — RANGEVIEW REMAND CENTRE
381. Mr P. PAPALIA to the Minister for Corrective Services:
I refer to today's reports by both the Inspector of
Custodial Services and the Auditor General and his government's
decision to break a 2008 election promise to build a new young men's
prison and, instead, to shut Rangeview Juvenile Remand Centre and cram all
juvenile offenders into one facility at Banksia Hill.
Did his government conduct a risk
analysis before making the decision in 2009 to shut the Rangeview remanned
centre?
DETAINEES — RANGEVIEW REMAND CENTRE
381. Mr P. PAPALIA to the Minister for Corrective Services:
I refer to today's reports by both the Inspector of
Custodial Services and the Auditor General and his government's
decision to break a 2008 election promise to build a new young men's
prison and, instead, to shut Rangeview Juvenile Remand Centre and cram all
juvenile offenders into one facility at Banksia Hill.
Did his government conduct a risk
analysis before making the decision in 2009 to shut the Rangeview remanned
centre?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member very much for his question. I will say
that I believe to this day there was merit in changing the purpose of Rangeview
to a correctional facility for young males —
Mr
P. Papalia : Did you do a risk analysis?
Mr
J.M. FRANCIS : There were two parts to the question.
Mr
W.J. Johnston interjected.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Cannington, I call you to order for the first time.
Mr J.M. FRANCIS : —
aged 18 to 24 years old who could be ostracised from the mainstream prison
population, and those who have been sentenced for short periods, so they would
have the best chance of rehabilitation and less chance of reoffending. The
government was then and is now very committed to breaking the cycle of
reoffending, especially those we say are the most decent. In this particular
circumstance, when it comes to Rangeview, as I said, we are obviously talking
about the young males who have the best chance of rehabilitation.
As far as the risk assessment on the process of moving
juveniles is concerned —
Mr P. Papalia : No;
in 2009, when the decision was made.
Mr J.M. FRANCIS : I am not too sure what happened in 2009; I
was not part of cabinet in 2009; I was not the minister in 2009. I can tell
members that a number of concerns were raised by the Inspector of Custodial
Services and by the union that represents youth custodial workers about the
procedure to move juveniles from their previous facility into Banksia Hill
Detention Centre. I can also tell the member for Warnbro that the minister at
that time raised those issues and concerns with the Commissioner for Corrective
Services. In advice to the then Minister for Corrective Services, the
Commissioner for Corrective Services made a number of undertakings. Clearly,
the department did not follow through on those undertakings. If members are
interested, I refer them to page 23 of the report, ''Directed Review
into an Incident at Banksia Hill Detention Centre on 20 January 2013'',
which was tabled today by the Inspector of Custodial Services.
Mr W.J. Johnston : You are too scared to answer the question!
Mr J.M. FRANCIS : The member is a good argument for
breed-specific legislation! You just never shut up!
Mr W.J. Johnston interjected.
The SPEAKER : Member for Cannington, I call you to order for the second time.
Minister, can you wind this up, please?
Mr J.M. FRANCIS : The Inspector of Custodial Services made
perfectly clear in his report that the minister at that time had concerns about
the transfer of juveniles and also the advice that was given by the then
Commissioner of Corrective Services to the then minister. I direct members to
three key points in the report of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial
Services. In paragraph 2.23 the inspector states —
It
is of grave concern that, at around the same time, the Department did not follow
through on commitments that it had given to the then Minister.
Paragraph 2.25 reads —
Although
the Department took some steps on some of these strategies, the actions and
outcomes fell far short of what would reasonably have been expected by the Minister
or, indeed, by Banksia Hill staff. This placed the site and the Minister at
further risk. The Inquiry also sighted other examples of poor follow through on
Ministerial advice.
Lastly, paragraph 2.26 reads —
It is not the job of Ministers to run departments or to constantly
follow up on assurances they have been given. The political accountability of
Ministers is dependent on departments providing them with accurate, balanced
advice, including the risks, and following through on commitments.
that I believe to this day there was merit in changing the purpose of Rangeview
to a correctional facility for young males —
Mr
P. Papalia : Did you do a risk analysis?
Mr
J.M. FRANCIS : There were two parts to the question.
Mr
W.J. Johnston interjected.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Cannington, I call you to order for the first time.
Mr J.M. FRANCIS : —
aged 18 to 24 years old who could be ostracised from the mainstream prison
population, and those who have been sentenced for short periods, so they would
have the best chance of rehabilitation and less chance of reoffending. The
government was then and is now very committed to breaking the cycle of
reoffending, especially those we say are the most decent. In this particular
circumstance, when it comes to Rangeview, as I said, we are obviously talking
about the young males who have the best chance of rehabilitation.
As far as the risk assessment on the process of moving
juveniles is concerned —
Mr P. Papalia : No;
in 2009, when the decision was made.
Mr J.M. FRANCIS : I am not too sure what happened in 2009; I
was not part of cabinet in 2009; I was not the minister in 2009. I can tell
members that a number of concerns were raised by the Inspector of Custodial
Services and by the union that represents youth custodial workers about the
procedure to move juveniles from their previous facility into Banksia Hill
Detention Centre. I can also tell the member for Warnbro that the minister at
that time raised those issues and concerns with the Commissioner for Corrective
Services. In advice to the then Minister for Corrective Services, the
Commissioner for Corrective Services made a number of undertakings. Clearly,
the department did not follow through on those undertakings. If members are
interested, I refer them to page 23 of the report, ''Directed Review
into an Incident at Banksia Hill Detention Centre on 20 January 2013'',
which was tabled today by the Inspector of Custodial Services.
Mr W.J. Johnston : You are too scared to answer the question!
Mr J.M. FRANCIS : The member is a good argument for
breed-specific legislation! You just never shut up!
Mr W.J. Johnston interjected.
The SPEAKER : Member for Cannington, I call you to order for the second time.
Minister, can you wind this up, please?
Mr J.M. FRANCIS : The Inspector of Custodial Services made
perfectly clear in his report that the minister at that time had concerns about
the transfer of juveniles and also the advice that was given by the then
Commissioner of Corrective Services to the then minister. I direct members to
three key points in the report of the Office of the Inspector of Custodial
Services. In paragraph 2.23 the inspector states —
It
is of grave concern that, at around the same time, the Department did not follow
through on commitments that it had given to the then Minister.
Paragraph 2.25 reads —
Although
the Department took some steps on some of these strategies, the actions and
outcomes fell far short of what would reasonably have been expected by the Minister
or, indeed, by Banksia Hill staff. This placed the site and the Minister at
further risk. The Inquiry also sighted other examples of poor follow through on
Ministerial advice.
Lastly, paragraph 2.26 reads —
It is not the job of Ministers to run departments or to constantly
follow up on assurances they have been given. The political accountability of
Ministers is dependent on departments providing them with accurate, balanced
advice, including the risks, and following through on commitments.
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.