❓ Ms Walker questions the AG's change of mind regarding referring the Moira Rayner matter to the DPP and seeks assurance of no government involvement in misleading media stories. The AG defends his actions and criticizes Ms Walker's conduct.
AnsweredQoN 443Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the Attorney General’s comments on radio at 8.50 am last Friday morning when asked if he would refer the Moira Rayner matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions, as suggested by me, that “It’s not a sensible proposition . . .” Later the Attorney General announced at a doorstop interview in Fremantle that he would refer the matter to the DPP. (1) What occurred between the radio interview and the doorstop interview to make the Attorney General change his mind? (2) Can he categorically state that neither he nor anyone else from the government was involved in orchestrating the misleading story given to the media by Ms Rayner? Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I can certainly give a categorical assurance in respect of the remarkable story told by Ms Rayner that, frankly, beggars belief. Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
(1) What occurred between the radio interview and the doorstop interview to make the Attorney General change his mind? (2) Can he categorically state that neither he nor anyone else from the government was involved in orchestrating the misleading story given to the media by Ms Rayner? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I can certainly give a categorical assurance in respect of the remarkable story told by Ms Rayner that, frankly, beggars belief. Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
(2) Can he categorically state that neither he nor anyone else from the government was involved in orchestrating the misleading story given to the media by Ms Rayner? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I can certainly give a categorical assurance in respect of the remarkable story told by Ms Rayner that, frankly, beggars belief. Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I can certainly give a categorical assurance in respect of the remarkable story told by Ms Rayner that, frankly, beggars belief. Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
(1)-(2) I can certainly give a categorical assurance in respect of the remarkable story told by Ms Rayner that, frankly, beggars belief. Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
(1) What occurred between the radio interview and the doorstop interview to make the Attorney General change his mind? (2) Can he categorically state that neither he nor anyone else from the government was involved in orchestrating the misleading story given to the media by Ms Rayner? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I can certainly give a categorical assurance in respect of the remarkable story told by Ms Rayner that, frankly, beggars belief. Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
(2) Can he categorically state that neither he nor anyone else from the government was involved in orchestrating the misleading story given to the media by Ms Rayner? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I can certainly give a categorical assurance in respect of the remarkable story told by Ms Rayner that, frankly, beggars belief. Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) I can certainly give a categorical assurance in respect of the remarkable story told by Ms Rayner that, frankly, beggars belief. Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
(1)-(2) I can certainly give a categorical assurance in respect of the remarkable story told by Ms Rayner that, frankly, beggars belief. Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker : Why is the member for Perth always protecting her? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : I do not think he is, and I think it demeans the member to put that proposition forward. Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker : He is defending her. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member has been running around the countryside over the past few days condemning everyone under the sun. It has been like someone who has taken a shotgun out trying to shoot fish in a barrel, hoping to hit one on the way through. Unfortunately, the member did not hit one. She condemned her own Liberal Party colleagues who are members of the parliamentary committee - Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker : I didn’t. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : Oh, yes, the member did, and they are very upset about that, let me tell the member. They are not at all happy about the member’s criticisms - Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker : How do you know? Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : I have spoken to them, and they have told me that they are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Several members interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: They are most unhappy with the member for Nedlands. She is condemning her own Liberal Party colleagues and further marginalising herself and the Liberal Party. She has cast a slur on Chris Shanahan, SC, in raising all sorts of questions about his appointment as acting commissioner of the CCC. She has led Paul Murray into serious error as a result of the way she has flamboyantly and dishonestly addressed these issues in recent days. Point of Order Ms S.E. WALKER : I have not been dishonest, and that imputation against my character is unparliamentary. The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
The SPEAKER : The use of the word “dishonesty” does not take the debate to the point of calling people liars in this chamber. It is very close, and I am sure the Attorney General is capable of using other words to achieve what he wants without resorting to those sorts of words. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Friday morning was simply this: would I refer - Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker : You’ve been dishonest a few times since I’ve been in this Parliament. You’re a dishonest man. Point of Order Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Given your earlier ruling, Mr Speaker, the member for Nedlands has just described the Attorney General as a dishonest man, which I think is a breach of standing orders. The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
The SPEAKER : Therein lies the problem with the use of terminologies that are close to the mark in relation to unparliamentary language. Using those words does not get us anywhere, and people should desist from it. Questions without Notice Resumed Mr J.A. McGINTY : The question that was put to me on the Paul Murray program last Friday morning was whether I would refer a report that I had not seen, and which was not in the public arena, to the Director of Public Prosecutions for investigation. Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Ms S.E. Walker interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
The SPEAKER : Order, member for Nedlands! Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member for Nedlands should know that the DPP prosecutes; he does not conduct investigations. It is as simple as that. The simple question put to me was whether I would refer to the DPP the report that I had not seen - it was the report given to the Parliament on the previous evening - but which I knew contained a finding by Malcolm McCusker that the conduct of Moira Rayner did not constitute criminal activity. That was a finding made by Malcolm McCusker, and we have all since read the report. I was asked whether I would forward a report I had not seen and did not have a copy of to the DPP for investigation. That is, quite frankly, a silly proposition because the DPP does not conduct investigations, and does not have the staff to do that; he is there to prosecute. I was quite happy to trust the view of the most eminent person in this state when it comes to these matters - a person whom this Parliament has entrusted with the responsibility of investigating allegations of misconduct by the CCC - Malcolm McCusker, QC. Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr M.J. Cowper : He is not an investigator. Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : Yes, he is. As will be revealed, he took sworn evidence from Moira Rayner, and on the basis of that sworn evidence he made his findings. If that is not an investigation, I do not know what it is. The DPP does not have the power to do that; the DPP is there to prosecute when sufficient material is available. Later in the day, having said that in my view it was not appropriate to have an investigation undertaken by the DPP, because of the broader public interest in this matter I was happy to speak to Robert Cock, QC, the DPP, and ask him for a second opinion on the availability of a prosecution against Ms Rayner for her serious misconduct, and whether a criminal charge could be sustained. That is what occurred on Friday.
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.