❓ A parliamentary question regarding the Minister's intervention in the Real Estate Institute of WA's (REIWA) nomination to the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board. The Minister defends the decision based on trust account integrity concerns.
AnsweredQoN 880Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the minister’s crude attempt to block the Real Estate Institute of WA’s nomination of Mr Michael Hoad to the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board by advising the Governor not to accept the nomination. (1) Under what statutory authority has the minister presumed to intervene in REIWA’s considered nomination of Mr Hoad? (2) Does the minister intend to defend potential legal action expected to be brought against him by REIWA in respect of his intervention in the nomination of Mr Hoad and, if so, will he use taxpayer dollars to fund it? (3) Given the unequivocal advice provided to REIWA by Malcolm McCusker QC on this issue - a copy of which has been provided to the minister - that the minister has “no statutory discretion to reject REIWA’s nominee” and that “the minister is bound to recommend to Cabinet, and the Cabinet is in turn bound to advise the Governor to appoint Mr Hoad to the board”, will the minister admit that he has acted without any lawful or moral justification and cease any further intervention? Mr KOBELKE
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
(1) Under what statutory authority has the minister presumed to intervene in REIWA’s considered nomination of Mr Hoad? (2) Does the minister intend to defend potential legal action expected to be brought against him by REIWA in respect of his intervention in the nomination of Mr Hoad and, if so, will he use taxpayer dollars to fund it? (3) Given the unequivocal advice provided to REIWA by Malcolm McCusker QC on this issue - a copy of which has been provided to the minister - that the minister has “no statutory discretion to reject REIWA’s nominee” and that “the minister is bound to recommend to Cabinet, and the Cabinet is in turn bound to advise the Governor to appoint Mr Hoad to the board”, will the minister admit that he has acted without any lawful or moral justification and cease any further intervention? Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
(2) Does the minister intend to defend potential legal action expected to be brought against him by REIWA in respect of his intervention in the nomination of Mr Hoad and, if so, will he use taxpayer dollars to fund it? (3) Given the unequivocal advice provided to REIWA by Malcolm McCusker QC on this issue - a copy of which has been provided to the minister - that the minister has “no statutory discretion to reject REIWA’s nominee” and that “the minister is bound to recommend to Cabinet, and the Cabinet is in turn bound to advise the Governor to appoint Mr Hoad to the board”, will the minister admit that he has acted without any lawful or moral justification and cease any further intervention? Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
(3) Given the unequivocal advice provided to REIWA by Malcolm McCusker QC on this issue - a copy of which has been provided to the minister - that the minister has “no statutory discretion to reject REIWA’s nominee” and that “the minister is bound to recommend to Cabinet, and the Cabinet is in turn bound to advise the Governor to appoint Mr Hoad to the board”, will the minister admit that he has acted without any lawful or moral justification and cease any further intervention? Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
(1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
(1) Under what statutory authority has the minister presumed to intervene in REIWA’s considered nomination of Mr Hoad? (2) Does the minister intend to defend potential legal action expected to be brought against him by REIWA in respect of his intervention in the nomination of Mr Hoad and, if so, will he use taxpayer dollars to fund it? (3) Given the unequivocal advice provided to REIWA by Malcolm McCusker QC on this issue - a copy of which has been provided to the minister - that the minister has “no statutory discretion to reject REIWA’s nominee” and that “the minister is bound to recommend to Cabinet, and the Cabinet is in turn bound to advise the Governor to appoint Mr Hoad to the board”, will the minister admit that he has acted without any lawful or moral justification and cease any further intervention? Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
(2) Does the minister intend to defend potential legal action expected to be brought against him by REIWA in respect of his intervention in the nomination of Mr Hoad and, if so, will he use taxpayer dollars to fund it? (3) Given the unequivocal advice provided to REIWA by Malcolm McCusker QC on this issue - a copy of which has been provided to the minister - that the minister has “no statutory discretion to reject REIWA’s nominee” and that “the minister is bound to recommend to Cabinet, and the Cabinet is in turn bound to advise the Governor to appoint Mr Hoad to the board”, will the minister admit that he has acted without any lawful or moral justification and cease any further intervention? Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
(3) Given the unequivocal advice provided to REIWA by Malcolm McCusker QC on this issue - a copy of which has been provided to the minister - that the minister has “no statutory discretion to reject REIWA’s nominee” and that “the minister is bound to recommend to Cabinet, and the Cabinet is in turn bound to advise the Governor to appoint Mr Hoad to the board”, will the minister admit that he has acted without any lawful or moral justification and cease any further intervention? Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
Mr KOBELKE replied: (1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
(1)-(3) The question may be improper but it addresses a very important issue. I thank the member for the question. I take it from the imputations that the member supports the appointment of Mr Hoad to the board. Imputations in the question are that the member supports the appointment. Does the Leader of the Opposition support the appointment? The Opposition does not wish to face up to probity issues. When the Opposition was in government it let hundreds, if not thousands, of people in this State lose their hard-earned money through their finance broker mates. That is what they did in government! They had no interest in honesty or upholding standards. They have not changed their spots. The Opposition does not want to listen to the answer because it is not interested in integrity or upholding standards. This Government, led by Dr Gallop, is clearly changing the way government operates in this State. It is concerned with establishing standards and ensuring that those standards are upheld. That is very different from the way in which the previous Government did not hold any standards at all in a range of areas. I want to put a number of important issues on the record. One is that I do not have issue with Mr Hoad’s integrity or his professional standards. In the Gunning and Temby inquiries there was clear evidence that many Western Australians have lost money - have had money stolen - through the use of trust accounts. Money was put into trust accounts. A number of statutes of this Parliament make it very clear that trust accounts exist to protect consumers and the people responsible for trust accounts have to ensure the integrity of those trust accounts. There is a very clear legal requirement on holders of real estate licences that they maintain the integrity of trust accounts. It is a most serious matter. Mr Hoad was found by the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board to have been responsible for a trust account from which money was misappropriated. It was not the fault of Mr Hoad. Someone employed by Mr Hoad stole from that trust account. The issue was that Mr Hoad had a statutory responsibility for the trust account, but he did not live up to that responsibility. As the minister responsible I would be willing to overlook that. In business, things go wrong. If someone accepts that he is responsible for a trust account from which someone stole funds, and he fixes that and accepts that he needs to do better and that the integrity of trust accounts is fundamental to a real estate agent’s licence, there would not be a problem. That was not the attitude Mr Hoad took. Mr Hoad called the investigating officers zealots and Nazis. The argument was put that he was a whistleblower; that he was a whistleblower in fulfilling his statutory responsibility. On that basis it was my view - which was confirmed formally by the Government - that I could not support someone to uphold the laws of this State to ensure the integrity of trust accounts if that person believed that the whole regulatory regime should not be working the way it is. Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
Of course, the regulatory authority, the Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board, has been going through the trust account books of various real estate agents. I understand that some of the real estate agents do not like that. However, if they are even somewhat aware of what the last Government allowed to happen in the finance broking industry with the abuse of trust accounts, they would know that we must maintain the highest possible standards. The Gallop Government will do that. On that basis, the Government advised the Governor to not appoint the person recommended by the Real Estate Institute of Western Australia. The Act clearly states that the board industry member must be a REIWA nominee. REIWA put forward a nominee, but the Governor, rightly acting on the advice of the Government, did not appoint him. I have worked with REIWA for six months to try to get it to understand that the standards have changed; that this Government will uphold and protect the rights of the citizens of this State. I have tried to get REIWA to understand that trust accounts cannot be abused and that the people responsible for administering trust accounts will be brought to account if the accounts are stolen from. We will not resile from that principle. I think I have a very good relationship with REIWA, and I hope to build on it. However, the institute must understand that this Government is different from the last Government, and that standards must be upheld. We will not back down from protecting the consumers of this State. The last Government did not care a fig about looking after people; it was worried only about looking after its mates.
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.