❓ The Attorney General announces the imminent introduction of legislation to establish the Corruption and Crime Commission, criticising the opposition's lukewarm response and defending the necessity of authorised operations based on the Police Royal Commission's success.
AnsweredQoN 695Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Can the Attorney General inform the House when we can expect to see some legislation to finally establish a new, effective anticorruption watchdog for Western Australia? Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for Perth for the question. I am pleased to advise the House that the legislation designed to establish the Corruption and Crime Commission will be introduced into the House on Thursday this week. To ensure that this legislation receives plenty of scrutiny and debate, the Government will schedule extra sittings on 3, 4 and 5 June. In saying that, I offer our full cooperation and assistance to the Opposition with a view to achieving bipartisan support for this important legislation. For that reason, I was disappointed but not surprised to hear the Leader of the Opposition say on ABC radio this morning - . . . some quite excessive powers will be given to this new body . . . That’s something that I would not necessarily support. That led the newsreader to conclude that the State Opposition is unsure whether it will support legislation to create a new corruption-fighting body in Western Australia. I am not surprised because the Liberal Party has had an unfortunate track record in recent times on matters relating to corruption in Western Australia. The Anti-Corruption Commission, a creation of the Liberal Party, was set up to fail, in the words of its chairman, Terry O’Connor. During the finance brokers corruption scandal, the Liberal Party was asleep at the wheel and did nothing about it. It opposed the establishment of the Royal Commission Into Whether There Has Been Any Corrupt or Criminal Conduct by Western Australian Police Officers saying that it was a waste of money. Now it is lukewarm to the proposition of implementing the recommendations of the police royal commission established by this Government. I am also disappointed because the use of authorised operations - the very matter that the Leader of the Opposition has indicated his concern about - has been an outstanding success during the police royal commission. Integrity testing, controlled operations and assumed identities have all been employed during the commission’s operations. Operational sensitivities preclude me from discussing the matters in detail. However, I can indicate that the recent exposé concerning the police officer known as T2 and the Pemberton officer, Constable Purvey, relied heavily on these authorised operations for its success. For example, the work undertaken at the Belmont test site for T2 was possible only by the use of assumed identities by royal commission officers to gain access to the test site and to effect the necessary installation of surveillance equipment and so forth without undue notice being given to their activities. In addition to the activities at the test site, all the operational support techniques that were employed to support the officers and provide them with the necessary cover were effected by the use of assumed identities. The evidence of the theft of moneys by T2 and his conspiracy to commit the theft with other persons was gained by way of the intricate planning and targeting that is a necessary component of every integrity test and controlled operation. Similarly, the integrity test conducted on Constable Purvey could have been possible only by the use of authorised operation powers. It is noteworthy that both T2 and Constable Purvey were the subject of investigation by the Western Australia Police Service, with no success. The Police Service does not have the statutory power to conduct authorised operations. However, the royal commission, by use of its authorised operations powers, was able to achieve success in relation to both officers. It is important to note that it was the result of earlier attention by the WA Police Service that qualified these officers for the targeted tests that were conducted by the royal commission. Authorised operations are not used lightly. They can be expensive and time consuming, and at all times involve detailed planning. It is for this reason that the responsible use of these powers by the royal commission has been limited to targeted officers. Such responsible use is also contemplated for the Corruption and Crime Commission. I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: I thank the member for Perth for the question. I am pleased to advise the House that the legislation designed to establish the Corruption and Crime Commission will be introduced into the House on Thursday this week. To ensure that this legislation receives plenty of scrutiny and debate, the Government will schedule extra sittings on 3, 4 and 5 June. In saying that, I offer our full cooperation and assistance to the Opposition with a view to achieving bipartisan support for this important legislation. For that reason, I was disappointed but not surprised to hear the Leader of the Opposition say on ABC radio this morning - . . . some quite excessive powers will be given to this new body . . . That’s something that I would not necessarily support. That led the newsreader to conclude that the State Opposition is unsure whether it will support legislation to create a new corruption-fighting body in Western Australia. I am not surprised because the Liberal Party has had an unfortunate track record in recent times on matters relating to corruption in Western Australia. The Anti-Corruption Commission, a creation of the Liberal Party, was set up to fail, in the words of its chairman, Terry O’Connor. During the finance brokers corruption scandal, the Liberal Party was asleep at the wheel and did nothing about it. It opposed the establishment of the Royal Commission Into Whether There Has Been Any Corrupt or Criminal Conduct by Western Australian Police Officers saying that it was a waste of money. Now it is lukewarm to the proposition of implementing the recommendations of the police royal commission established by this Government. I am also disappointed because the use of authorised operations - the very matter that the Leader of the Opposition has indicated his concern about - has been an outstanding success during the police royal commission. Integrity testing, controlled operations and assumed identities have all been employed during the commission’s operations. Operational sensitivities preclude me from discussing the matters in detail. However, I can indicate that the recent exposé concerning the police officer known as T2 and the Pemberton officer, Constable Purvey, relied heavily on these authorised operations for its success. For example, the work undertaken at the Belmont test site for T2 was possible only by the use of assumed identities by royal commission officers to gain access to the test site and to effect the necessary installation of surveillance equipment and so forth without undue notice being given to their activities. In addition to the activities at the test site, all the operational support techniques that were employed to support the officers and provide them with the necessary cover were effected by the use of assumed identities. The evidence of the theft of moneys by T2 and his conspiracy to commit the theft with other persons was gained by way of the intricate planning and targeting that is a necessary component of every integrity test and controlled operation. Similarly, the integrity test conducted on Constable Purvey could have been possible only by the use of authorised operation powers. It is noteworthy that both T2 and Constable Purvey were the subject of investigation by the Western Australia Police Service, with no success. The Police Service does not have the statutory power to conduct authorised operations. However, the royal commission, by use of its authorised operations powers, was able to achieve success in relation to both officers. It is important to note that it was the result of earlier attention by the WA Police Service that qualified these officers for the targeted tests that were conducted by the royal commission. Authorised operations are not used lightly. They can be expensive and time consuming, and at all times involve detailed planning. It is for this reason that the responsible use of these powers by the royal commission has been limited to targeted officers. Such responsible use is also contemplated for the Corruption and Crime Commission. I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
I thank the member for Perth for the question. I am pleased to advise the House that the legislation designed to establish the Corruption and Crime Commission will be introduced into the House on Thursday this week. To ensure that this legislation receives plenty of scrutiny and debate, the Government will schedule extra sittings on 3, 4 and 5 June. In saying that, I offer our full cooperation and assistance to the Opposition with a view to achieving bipartisan support for this important legislation. For that reason, I was disappointed but not surprised to hear the Leader of the Opposition say on ABC radio this morning - . . . some quite excessive powers will be given to this new body . . . That’s something that I would not necessarily support. That led the newsreader to conclude that the State Opposition is unsure whether it will support legislation to create a new corruption-fighting body in Western Australia. I am not surprised because the Liberal Party has had an unfortunate track record in recent times on matters relating to corruption in Western Australia. The Anti-Corruption Commission, a creation of the Liberal Party, was set up to fail, in the words of its chairman, Terry O’Connor. During the finance brokers corruption scandal, the Liberal Party was asleep at the wheel and did nothing about it. It opposed the establishment of the Royal Commission Into Whether There Has Been Any Corrupt or Criminal Conduct by Western Australian Police Officers saying that it was a waste of money. Now it is lukewarm to the proposition of implementing the recommendations of the police royal commission established by this Government. I am also disappointed because the use of authorised operations - the very matter that the Leader of the Opposition has indicated his concern about - has been an outstanding success during the police royal commission. Integrity testing, controlled operations and assumed identities have all been employed during the commission’s operations. Operational sensitivities preclude me from discussing the matters in detail. However, I can indicate that the recent exposé concerning the police officer known as T2 and the Pemberton officer, Constable Purvey, relied heavily on these authorised operations for its success. For example, the work undertaken at the Belmont test site for T2 was possible only by the use of assumed identities by royal commission officers to gain access to the test site and to effect the necessary installation of surveillance equipment and so forth without undue notice being given to their activities. In addition to the activities at the test site, all the operational support techniques that were employed to support the officers and provide them with the necessary cover were effected by the use of assumed identities. The evidence of the theft of moneys by T2 and his conspiracy to commit the theft with other persons was gained by way of the intricate planning and targeting that is a necessary component of every integrity test and controlled operation. Similarly, the integrity test conducted on Constable Purvey could have been possible only by the use of authorised operation powers. It is noteworthy that both T2 and Constable Purvey were the subject of investigation by the Western Australia Police Service, with no success. The Police Service does not have the statutory power to conduct authorised operations. However, the royal commission, by use of its authorised operations powers, was able to achieve success in relation to both officers. It is important to note that it was the result of earlier attention by the WA Police Service that qualified these officers for the targeted tests that were conducted by the royal commission. Authorised operations are not used lightly. They can be expensive and time consuming, and at all times involve detailed planning. It is for this reason that the responsible use of these powers by the royal commission has been limited to targeted officers. Such responsible use is also contemplated for the Corruption and Crime Commission. I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
I am also disappointed because the use of authorised operations - the very matter that the Leader of the Opposition has indicated his concern about - has been an outstanding success during the police royal commission. Integrity testing, controlled operations and assumed identities have all been employed during the commission’s operations. Operational sensitivities preclude me from discussing the matters in detail. However, I can indicate that the recent exposé concerning the police officer known as T2 and the Pemberton officer, Constable Purvey, relied heavily on these authorised operations for its success. For example, the work undertaken at the Belmont test site for T2 was possible only by the use of assumed identities by royal commission officers to gain access to the test site and to effect the necessary installation of surveillance equipment and so forth without undue notice being given to their activities. In addition to the activities at the test site, all the operational support techniques that were employed to support the officers and provide them with the necessary cover were effected by the use of assumed identities. The evidence of the theft of moneys by T2 and his conspiracy to commit the theft with other persons was gained by way of the intricate planning and targeting that is a necessary component of every integrity test and controlled operation. Similarly, the integrity test conducted on Constable Purvey could have been possible only by the use of authorised operation powers. It is noteworthy that both T2 and Constable Purvey were the subject of investigation by the Western Australia Police Service, with no success. The Police Service does not have the statutory power to conduct authorised operations. However, the royal commission, by use of its authorised operations powers, was able to achieve success in relation to both officers. It is important to note that it was the result of earlier attention by the WA Police Service that qualified these officers for the targeted tests that were conducted by the royal commission. Authorised operations are not used lightly. They can be expensive and time consuming, and at all times involve detailed planning. It is for this reason that the responsible use of these powers by the royal commission has been limited to targeted officers. Such responsible use is also contemplated for the Corruption and Crime Commission. I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
It is noteworthy that both T2 and Constable Purvey were the subject of investigation by the Western Australia Police Service, with no success. The Police Service does not have the statutory power to conduct authorised operations. However, the royal commission, by use of its authorised operations powers, was able to achieve success in relation to both officers. It is important to note that it was the result of earlier attention by the WA Police Service that qualified these officers for the targeted tests that were conducted by the royal commission. Authorised operations are not used lightly. They can be expensive and time consuming, and at all times involve detailed planning. It is for this reason that the responsible use of these powers by the royal commission has been limited to targeted officers. Such responsible use is also contemplated for the Corruption and Crime Commission. I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: I thank the member for Perth for the question. I am pleased to advise the House that the legislation designed to establish the Corruption and Crime Commission will be introduced into the House on Thursday this week. To ensure that this legislation receives plenty of scrutiny and debate, the Government will schedule extra sittings on 3, 4 and 5 June. In saying that, I offer our full cooperation and assistance to the Opposition with a view to achieving bipartisan support for this important legislation. For that reason, I was disappointed but not surprised to hear the Leader of the Opposition say on ABC radio this morning - . . . some quite excessive powers will be given to this new body . . . That’s something that I would not necessarily support. That led the newsreader to conclude that the State Opposition is unsure whether it will support legislation to create a new corruption-fighting body in Western Australia. I am not surprised because the Liberal Party has had an unfortunate track record in recent times on matters relating to corruption in Western Australia. The Anti-Corruption Commission, a creation of the Liberal Party, was set up to fail, in the words of its chairman, Terry O’Connor. During the finance brokers corruption scandal, the Liberal Party was asleep at the wheel and did nothing about it. It opposed the establishment of the Royal Commission Into Whether There Has Been Any Corrupt or Criminal Conduct by Western Australian Police Officers saying that it was a waste of money. Now it is lukewarm to the proposition of implementing the recommendations of the police royal commission established by this Government. I am also disappointed because the use of authorised operations - the very matter that the Leader of the Opposition has indicated his concern about - has been an outstanding success during the police royal commission. Integrity testing, controlled operations and assumed identities have all been employed during the commission’s operations. Operational sensitivities preclude me from discussing the matters in detail. However, I can indicate that the recent exposé concerning the police officer known as T2 and the Pemberton officer, Constable Purvey, relied heavily on these authorised operations for its success. For example, the work undertaken at the Belmont test site for T2 was possible only by the use of assumed identities by royal commission officers to gain access to the test site and to effect the necessary installation of surveillance equipment and so forth without undue notice being given to their activities. In addition to the activities at the test site, all the operational support techniques that were employed to support the officers and provide them with the necessary cover were effected by the use of assumed identities. The evidence of the theft of moneys by T2 and his conspiracy to commit the theft with other persons was gained by way of the intricate planning and targeting that is a necessary component of every integrity test and controlled operation. Similarly, the integrity test conducted on Constable Purvey could have been possible only by the use of authorised operation powers. It is noteworthy that both T2 and Constable Purvey were the subject of investigation by the Western Australia Police Service, with no success. The Police Service does not have the statutory power to conduct authorised operations. However, the royal commission, by use of its authorised operations powers, was able to achieve success in relation to both officers. It is important to note that it was the result of earlier attention by the WA Police Service that qualified these officers for the targeted tests that were conducted by the royal commission. Authorised operations are not used lightly. They can be expensive and time consuming, and at all times involve detailed planning. It is for this reason that the responsible use of these powers by the royal commission has been limited to targeted officers. Such responsible use is also contemplated for the Corruption and Crime Commission. I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
I thank the member for Perth for the question. I am pleased to advise the House that the legislation designed to establish the Corruption and Crime Commission will be introduced into the House on Thursday this week. To ensure that this legislation receives plenty of scrutiny and debate, the Government will schedule extra sittings on 3, 4 and 5 June. In saying that, I offer our full cooperation and assistance to the Opposition with a view to achieving bipartisan support for this important legislation. For that reason, I was disappointed but not surprised to hear the Leader of the Opposition say on ABC radio this morning - . . . some quite excessive powers will be given to this new body . . . That’s something that I would not necessarily support. That led the newsreader to conclude that the State Opposition is unsure whether it will support legislation to create a new corruption-fighting body in Western Australia. I am not surprised because the Liberal Party has had an unfortunate track record in recent times on matters relating to corruption in Western Australia. The Anti-Corruption Commission, a creation of the Liberal Party, was set up to fail, in the words of its chairman, Terry O’Connor. During the finance brokers corruption scandal, the Liberal Party was asleep at the wheel and did nothing about it. It opposed the establishment of the Royal Commission Into Whether There Has Been Any Corrupt or Criminal Conduct by Western Australian Police Officers saying that it was a waste of money. Now it is lukewarm to the proposition of implementing the recommendations of the police royal commission established by this Government. I am also disappointed because the use of authorised operations - the very matter that the Leader of the Opposition has indicated his concern about - has been an outstanding success during the police royal commission. Integrity testing, controlled operations and assumed identities have all been employed during the commission’s operations. Operational sensitivities preclude me from discussing the matters in detail. However, I can indicate that the recent exposé concerning the police officer known as T2 and the Pemberton officer, Constable Purvey, relied heavily on these authorised operations for its success. For example, the work undertaken at the Belmont test site for T2 was possible only by the use of assumed identities by royal commission officers to gain access to the test site and to effect the necessary installation of surveillance equipment and so forth without undue notice being given to their activities. In addition to the activities at the test site, all the operational support techniques that were employed to support the officers and provide them with the necessary cover were effected by the use of assumed identities. The evidence of the theft of moneys by T2 and his conspiracy to commit the theft with other persons was gained by way of the intricate planning and targeting that is a necessary component of every integrity test and controlled operation. Similarly, the integrity test conducted on Constable Purvey could have been possible only by the use of authorised operation powers. It is noteworthy that both T2 and Constable Purvey were the subject of investigation by the Western Australia Police Service, with no success. The Police Service does not have the statutory power to conduct authorised operations. However, the royal commission, by use of its authorised operations powers, was able to achieve success in relation to both officers. It is important to note that it was the result of earlier attention by the WA Police Service that qualified these officers for the targeted tests that were conducted by the royal commission. Authorised operations are not used lightly. They can be expensive and time consuming, and at all times involve detailed planning. It is for this reason that the responsible use of these powers by the royal commission has been limited to targeted officers. Such responsible use is also contemplated for the Corruption and Crime Commission. I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
I am also disappointed because the use of authorised operations - the very matter that the Leader of the Opposition has indicated his concern about - has been an outstanding success during the police royal commission. Integrity testing, controlled operations and assumed identities have all been employed during the commission’s operations. Operational sensitivities preclude me from discussing the matters in detail. However, I can indicate that the recent exposé concerning the police officer known as T2 and the Pemberton officer, Constable Purvey, relied heavily on these authorised operations for its success. For example, the work undertaken at the Belmont test site for T2 was possible only by the use of assumed identities by royal commission officers to gain access to the test site and to effect the necessary installation of surveillance equipment and so forth without undue notice being given to their activities. In addition to the activities at the test site, all the operational support techniques that were employed to support the officers and provide them with the necessary cover were effected by the use of assumed identities. The evidence of the theft of moneys by T2 and his conspiracy to commit the theft with other persons was gained by way of the intricate planning and targeting that is a necessary component of every integrity test and controlled operation. Similarly, the integrity test conducted on Constable Purvey could have been possible only by the use of authorised operation powers. It is noteworthy that both T2 and Constable Purvey were the subject of investigation by the Western Australia Police Service, with no success. The Police Service does not have the statutory power to conduct authorised operations. However, the royal commission, by use of its authorised operations powers, was able to achieve success in relation to both officers. It is important to note that it was the result of earlier attention by the WA Police Service that qualified these officers for the targeted tests that were conducted by the royal commission. Authorised operations are not used lightly. They can be expensive and time consuming, and at all times involve detailed planning. It is for this reason that the responsible use of these powers by the royal commission has been limited to targeted officers. Such responsible use is also contemplated for the Corruption and Crime Commission. I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
It is noteworthy that both T2 and Constable Purvey were the subject of investigation by the Western Australia Police Service, with no success. The Police Service does not have the statutory power to conduct authorised operations. However, the royal commission, by use of its authorised operations powers, was able to achieve success in relation to both officers. It is important to note that it was the result of earlier attention by the WA Police Service that qualified these officers for the targeted tests that were conducted by the royal commission. Authorised operations are not used lightly. They can be expensive and time consuming, and at all times involve detailed planning. It is for this reason that the responsible use of these powers by the royal commission has been limited to targeted officers. Such responsible use is also contemplated for the Corruption and Crime Commission. I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
I call upon the Opposition and all members of this Parliament not to be negative about this legislation but to embrace the opportunity to work with the Government to give Western Australia the necessary and tough anticorruption laws recommended by the police royal commission. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Perth to order for the first time.
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.