❓ The parliamentary question seeks data and explanations regarding the impact of incomplete Individual Management Plans (IMPs) on parole consideration delays. The Attorney General's response denies IMPs are relevant to parole decisions.
AnsweredQoN 523Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(1) How many matters referred to the Prisoners Review Board (PRB) in each of the financial years 2021–22, 2022–23, 2023–24, and 2024–25 were unable to be determined due to the absence of an Individual Management Plan (IMP) or one not being completed:(a) For each of those years, what proportion of total parole referrals did this represent; and(b) What was the average and maximum delay to parole consideration caused by outstanding documentation from Corrective Services?(2) Has the PRB raised any concerns with the Attorney General or the Department of Justice regarding delays to parole consideration due to the failure to complete IMPs?(3) Has the Attorney General or the PRB provided advice to Government, or any Minister, about the systemic impact of incomplete IMPs on the fairness or efficiency of the parole system?(4) What monitoring or reporting arrangements exist between the PRB and the Department of Justice to ensure that prisoners eligible for parole are not being held in custody beyond their eligibility date solely due to administrative or case management delays?(5) Has the Attorney General considered legislative or regulatory reform to address delays in parole consideration caused by incomplete IMPs, and if not, why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
14 October 2025
Responded by
Minister for Attorney General
Response time
7 days
(1) An Individual Management Plan (IMP) is not a document referred to by the Prisoners Review Board (the Board) in its consideration for release to parole under section 5A and 5B of the Sentence Administration Act 2003 ( WA) .
As such the absence (or presence) of an IMP had no bearing on parole considerations in the financial years for which data has been requested.
(a) – (b) See (1)
(2 - 3) The Board does not refer to IMPs in it is consideration of parole matters, therefore this is not a matter which has been raised with the Attorney General.
(4) Pursuant to section 20 of the Sentence Administration Act 2003 (WA), the Board must consider a prisoner on a day before their earliest eligible release date (EED). Accordingly, matters for parole consideration are reviewed by the Board prior to their EED, with the only exception being where the court has backdated a sentence resulting in the prisoners EED being in the past.
(5) Not applicable, see (1).
As such the absence (or presence) of an IMP had no bearing on parole considerations in the financial years for which data has been requested.
(a) – (b) See (1)
(2 - 3) The Board does not refer to IMPs in it is consideration of parole matters, therefore this is not a matter which has been raised with the Attorney General.
(4) Pursuant to section 20 of the Sentence Administration Act 2003 (WA), the Board must consider a prisoner on a day before their earliest eligible release date (EED). Accordingly, matters for parole consideration are reviewed by the Board prior to their EED, with the only exception being where the court has backdated a sentence resulting in the prisoners EED being in the past.
(5) Not applicable, see (1).
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.