❓ Question regarding the Mahoney report on prison mismanagement, directed at the Minister for Justice, criticising the lack of accountability for responsible parties and the absence of the former minister's testimony. The Minister's answer deflects and attacks the opposition's competency.
AnsweredQoN 765Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
My question is to the Minister for Justice. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. Mr A.D. McRae : Have you read it? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. Mr A.D. McRae : Have you read it? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. Mr A.D. McRae : Have you read it? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. Mr A.D. McRae : Have you read it? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr A.D. McRae : Have you read it? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
(1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
(2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
(1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. Mr A.D. McRae : Have you read it? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. Mr A.D. McRae : Have you read it? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. Mr A.D. McRae : Have you read it? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr A.D. McRae : Have you read it? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I was not given a chance to read it because of the government’s disgraceful behaviour. Members should be ashamed of themselves. The Premier and the Attorney General know that they stand condemned. Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr J.N. Hyde : Is this cash for comment? Withdrawal of Remark Mr C.J. BARNETT : The member for Perth’s interjection impugned the reputation of the member for Hillarys. To make reference to cash for comments, which has a direct relationship to the events that took place in the British House of Commons, is highly offensive and implies improper conduct and behaviour by a member of this Parliament. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to ask the member for Perth to withdraw and apologise for his totally inappropriate comment. The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : I did not hear the comment. The member for Perth knows both what he said and his intent. If his comment was intended to insult the member for Hillarys, he should withdraw. Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : I distinctly heard that member there say, “Is this cash for comments” - The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : Take a seat. It is irrelevant whether the member for Darling Range heard the member for Perth’s comment. I have stated that I did not hear it, but I have put it to the member for Perth that if he said what was alleged in that tone - Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr J.H.D. Day : He did. The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : The member for Darling Range does not have to keep commenting on the fact that he heard the member for Perth’s comment. We all heard you say that. It does not matter whether he heard the member for Perth’s comment. Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr J.N. HYDE : I withdraw. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney - Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr A.D. McRae interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
The SPEAKER : Order, member for Riverton! Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON : I refer to the Mahoney report, which was tabled today. (1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
(1) Why is it that although the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General gave evidence to the inquiry, the Minister for Justice’s predecessor did not front up despite the fact that during the 18 months she was responsible for the portfolio there was example after example of gross mismanagement in the portfolio? (2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
(2) Why are there no findings in the report about the actions and decisions of the people responsible for the shambles in the portfolio; namely, the current minister, the Attorney General and the former minister? Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
Mr J.B. D’ORAZIO replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
(1)-(2) For three months I have been waiting to be asked a question by the opposition! At one stage I thought that the reason it had not asked me a question was that I must be doing a wonderful job, but I thought that that could not be right. Then I thought that it must be because members opposite are incompetent! That is probably true. However, the real reason that I have not received a question from the opposition is that the member for Hillarys has many wonderful policies, including flogging, castration and hanging - indeed, the list goes on. After the member for Hillarys announced his polices, the Leader of the Opposition stated that he was not quite sure whether they were Liberal Party policies and whether that is what was actually meant. If members want a clear example of where the opposition is at, we must look at what it has done. The Mahoney inquiry was probably the biggest inquiry into the prison system in the history of Western Australia. The opposition has been carping for months and months about what should and should not happen. Would the Leader of the Opposition like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Would the member Hillarys like to tell me what was in his submission to the inquiry? Do members want to know the answer? There was no submission! The Liberal Party in this state did not make a single submission to the most comprehensive review of the prison system in this state. That shows the competency of the opposition, yet it wants to question the government. Today we have published the report of the Mahoney inquiry and today we have set the framework for prison reform in this state. We will make sure that we make community safety a priority in the future and we will try to reduce the amount of reoffending that occurs in our community. We have a policy, but the opposition does not know what day of the week it is.
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.