A WA parliamentary question on notice addresses allegations that the Office of Crime Prevention is demanding contributions from local councils for a crime survey, potentially linking funding to payment. The Premier denies these allegations, stating the report is incomplete.

AnsweredQoN 144Legislative Council
Asked
31 March 2004
Portfolio
Leader of the House representing the Premier

QuestionView source ↗

(1) Is it correct that the Office of Crime Prevention is insisting that local government councils contribute to the cost of a survey on crime, which the councils need to fight crime in their area, as a condition of being given access to the report? (2) Does the Premier support this action; and, if so, what are his reasons? (3) How many government members have been asked to write to their local government councils to express the concern of constituents in their area regarding crime shortly after the Office of Crime Prevention demand had been made; and, if so, why? (4) How many councils has Michael Thorn of the Office of Crime Prevention written to since those councils indicated they would not contribute? Will the Premier table those letters; and, if not, why not? (5) How many councils has Michael Thorn threatened will lose anti-crime funding if they do not pay their allocated “contribution”? (6) Will the minister table the report that has been paid for by taxpayers? Hon KIM CHANCE

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for the question. In contrast to the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, my answer is - (1) No. (2) Not applicable. (3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
(2) Does the Premier support this action; and, if so, what are his reasons? (3) How many government members have been asked to write to their local government councils to express the concern of constituents in their area regarding crime shortly after the Office of Crime Prevention demand had been made; and, if so, why? (4) How many councils has Michael Thorn of the Office of Crime Prevention written to since those councils indicated they would not contribute? Will the Premier table those letters; and, if not, why not? (5) How many councils has Michael Thorn threatened will lose anti-crime funding if they do not pay their allocated “contribution”? (6) Will the minister table the report that has been paid for by taxpayers? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for the question. In contrast to the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, my answer is - (1) No. (2) Not applicable. (3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
(3) How many government members have been asked to write to their local government councils to express the concern of constituents in their area regarding crime shortly after the Office of Crime Prevention demand had been made; and, if so, why? (4) How many councils has Michael Thorn of the Office of Crime Prevention written to since those councils indicated they would not contribute? Will the Premier table those letters; and, if not, why not? (5) How many councils has Michael Thorn threatened will lose anti-crime funding if they do not pay their allocated “contribution”? (6) Will the minister table the report that has been paid for by taxpayers? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for the question. In contrast to the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, my answer is - (1) No. (2) Not applicable. (3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
(4) How many councils has Michael Thorn of the Office of Crime Prevention written to since those councils indicated they would not contribute? Will the Premier table those letters; and, if not, why not? (5) How many councils has Michael Thorn threatened will lose anti-crime funding if they do not pay their allocated “contribution”? (6) Will the minister table the report that has been paid for by taxpayers? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for the question. In contrast to the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, my answer is - (1) No. (2) Not applicable. (3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
(5) How many councils has Michael Thorn threatened will lose anti-crime funding if they do not pay their allocated “contribution”? (6) Will the minister table the report that has been paid for by taxpayers? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for the question. In contrast to the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, my answer is - (1) No. (2) Not applicable. (3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
(6) Will the minister table the report that has been paid for by taxpayers? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for the question. In contrast to the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, my answer is - (1) No. (2) Not applicable. (3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I thank the member for the question. In contrast to the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, my answer is - (1) No. (2) Not applicable. (3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
I thank the member for the question. In contrast to the Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure, my answer is - (1) No. (2) Not applicable. (3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
(1) No. (2) Not applicable. (3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
(2) Not applicable. (3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
(3) No. (4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
(4)-(5) None. (6) The report has not yet been completed.
(6) The report has not yet been completed.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more