❓ Mr. Love questions the Premier regarding the Ombudsman's testimony to the CCC about additional roles, expenditure on an OECD project, and the Premier's office's oversight. The Premier acknowledges the situation but avoids direct commentary, citing the independence of the involved authorities.
AnsweredQoN 41Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
OMBUDSMAN
— CORRUPTION AND CRIME COMMISSION
INQUIRY
41. Mr R.S. LOVE to the Premier:
I refer to the testimony of WA's
Ombudsman to the Corruption and Crime Commission in which he said —
''He (Daniel Pastorelli) was
comfortable with me undertaking the additional roles,'' �
He noted further that this would
require extra travel. He further said —
''I can tell you as a matter
of certainty that Daniel Pastorelli was informed about the OECD project. I am
on oath and I swear to that fact.''
Noting this, I ask the following.
(1) Can the Premier confirm that his chief of staff
had knowledge of and approved the additional roles and the expenditure of $200 000 for a project with the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development?
(2) If yes, was
this with the Premier's authority?
(3) Given the
extraordinary cost to the Western Australia taxpayer, how is it that the
Premier's office has allowed this situation to occur?
Several members
interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please!
Mr J.R. Quigley : Sub judice.
The
SPEAKER : I am not sure; I need to take some advice as to whether
this is sub judice or not.
For everyone's elucidation,
the CCC is an investigative agency; it is not a court of law. The only thing I note
from my knowledge of things is that sometimes if matters arise out of a CCC
inquiry, they can proceed to a court of law and
there is then the potential of prejudicing a future case. However, the
questions asked in this matter on this occasion I do not think
necessarily will prejudice any future actions that might be taken, so I will
allow the questions and call the Premier to respond.
— CORRUPTION AND CRIME COMMISSION
INQUIRY
41. Mr R.S. LOVE to the Premier:
I refer to the testimony of WA's
Ombudsman to the Corruption and Crime Commission in which he said —
''He (Daniel Pastorelli) was
comfortable with me undertaking the additional roles,'' �
He noted further that this would
require extra travel. He further said —
''I can tell you as a matter
of certainty that Daniel Pastorelli was informed about the OECD project. I am
on oath and I swear to that fact.''
Noting this, I ask the following.
(1) Can the Premier confirm that his chief of staff
had knowledge of and approved the additional roles and the expenditure of $200 000 for a project with the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development?
(2) If yes, was
this with the Premier's authority?
(3) Given the
extraordinary cost to the Western Australia taxpayer, how is it that the
Premier's office has allowed this situation to occur?
Several members
interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please!
Mr J.R. Quigley : Sub judice.
The
SPEAKER : I am not sure; I need to take some advice as to whether
this is sub judice or not.
For everyone's elucidation,
the CCC is an investigative agency; it is not a court of law. The only thing I note
from my knowledge of things is that sometimes if matters arise out of a CCC
inquiry, they can proceed to a court of law and
there is then the potential of prejudicing a future case. However, the
questions asked in this matter on this occasion I do not think
necessarily will prejudice any future actions that might be taken, so I will
allow the questions and call the Premier to respond.
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the
question. Obviously, what we have here is an independent judicial authority,
the Ombudsman, being questioned by an independent investigative authority, the
Corruption and Crime Commission. You will forgive me, Madam Speaker, for not
providing gratuitous commentary in terms of those particular discussions. I can
confirm the evidence that was put before the CCC hearing today, which is that
Mr Pastorelli was informed by the Ombudsman on 15 October about the arrangement
that he had entered into a year prior with the OECD is as it stands. I will
allow that evidence to speak for itself.
question. Obviously, what we have here is an independent judicial authority,
the Ombudsman, being questioned by an independent investigative authority, the
Corruption and Crime Commission. You will forgive me, Madam Speaker, for not
providing gratuitous commentary in terms of those particular discussions. I can
confirm the evidence that was put before the CCC hearing today, which is that
Mr Pastorelli was informed by the Ombudsman on 15 October about the arrangement
that he had entered into a year prior with the OECD is as it stands. I will
allow that evidence to speak for itself.
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.