❓ Opposition Leader Barnett questions Justice Minister Roberts about parole system changes following a fatal incident involving an offender on parole, linking it to the government's 'Reducing Imprisonment Program'. Roberts denies policy culpability, attributing the incident to departmental management failures.
AnsweredQoN 986Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to her comments in this House last Thursday that no changes have been made to the parole system by this Labor Government that have impacted on the events of last Tuesday, in which a woman was fatally injured allegedly by an offender on parole. I further refer the minister to the Department of Justice’s fact sheet entitled “Reducing Imprisonment Program”, released on 22 August 2003, which specifically states with regard to the breaching of community orders, which include parole - Offenders are now only returned to prison . . . when the reason for the breach justifies imprisonment - not for minor transgressions such as failing to meet a regular reporting obligation. (1) Can the minister confirm that this so-called reform has been in place since the Government endorsed its strategy to reduce the rate and costs of imprisonment in July 2001? (2) Can the minister also confirm that the other administrative reforms outlined, including improving access to bail and releasing prisoners at their earliest release date, are also currently in place? (3) Does the minister acknowledge that the consequences of these policies have been to allow high-risk offenders to return to the streets and remain there on either parole or bail? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) The Leader of the Opposition has been quite deceptive in that question. Clearly any reforms have been targeted at low-risk offenders, not high-risk offenders. The answer to the first question is no. I will seek some further information on the answer to the second question for him. The answer to the third question quite clearly is no. We are dealing with high-level offenders in a much tougher way than the previous Government. The reforms target only those people at the lower end with minor breaches. What occurred last week was totally and completely unacceptable in every shape and form. Under existing Department of Justice policy, there is no way that that offender should still have been out in the community. For a range of other reasons, which I am sure will come out in the review, that offender should not have been at large, should not have been on parole as of earlier this year and certainly should not have been on parole in August this year. Further than that, he should not have been bailed on an earlier charge by the police. It is completely unacceptable and is nothing to do with government policy. It is about the management of that offender by the Department of Justice.
(2) Can the minister also confirm that the other administrative reforms outlined, including improving access to bail and releasing prisoners at their earliest release date, are also currently in place? (3) Does the minister acknowledge that the consequences of these policies have been to allow high-risk offenders to return to the streets and remain there on either parole or bail? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: (1)-(3) The Leader of the Opposition has been quite deceptive in that question. Clearly any reforms have been targeted at low-risk offenders, not high-risk offenders. The answer to the first question is no. I will seek some further information on the answer to the second question for him. The answer to the third question quite clearly is no. We are dealing with high-level offenders in a much tougher way than the previous Government. The reforms target only those people at the lower end with minor breaches. What occurred last week was totally and completely unacceptable in every shape and form. Under existing Department of Justice policy, there is no way that that offender should still have been out in the community. For a range of other reasons, which I am sure will come out in the review, that offender should not have been at large, should not have been on parole as of earlier this year and certainly should not have been on parole in August this year. Further than that, he should not have been bailed on an earlier charge by the police. It is completely unacceptable and is nothing to do with government policy. It is about the management of that offender by the Department of Justice.
(3) Does the minister acknowledge that the consequences of these policies have been to allow high-risk offenders to return to the streets and remain there on either parole or bail? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: (1)-(3) The Leader of the Opposition has been quite deceptive in that question. Clearly any reforms have been targeted at low-risk offenders, not high-risk offenders. The answer to the first question is no. I will seek some further information on the answer to the second question for him. The answer to the third question quite clearly is no. We are dealing with high-level offenders in a much tougher way than the previous Government. The reforms target only those people at the lower end with minor breaches. What occurred last week was totally and completely unacceptable in every shape and form. Under existing Department of Justice policy, there is no way that that offender should still have been out in the community. For a range of other reasons, which I am sure will come out in the review, that offender should not have been at large, should not have been on parole as of earlier this year and certainly should not have been on parole in August this year. Further than that, he should not have been bailed on an earlier charge by the police. It is completely unacceptable and is nothing to do with government policy. It is about the management of that offender by the Department of Justice.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: (1)-(3) The Leader of the Opposition has been quite deceptive in that question. Clearly any reforms have been targeted at low-risk offenders, not high-risk offenders. The answer to the first question is no. I will seek some further information on the answer to the second question for him. The answer to the third question quite clearly is no. We are dealing with high-level offenders in a much tougher way than the previous Government. The reforms target only those people at the lower end with minor breaches. What occurred last week was totally and completely unacceptable in every shape and form. Under existing Department of Justice policy, there is no way that that offender should still have been out in the community. For a range of other reasons, which I am sure will come out in the review, that offender should not have been at large, should not have been on parole as of earlier this year and certainly should not have been on parole in August this year. Further than that, he should not have been bailed on an earlier charge by the police. It is completely unacceptable and is nothing to do with government policy. It is about the management of that offender by the Department of Justice.
(1)-(3) The Leader of the Opposition has been quite deceptive in that question. Clearly any reforms have been targeted at low-risk offenders, not high-risk offenders. The answer to the first question is no. I will seek some further information on the answer to the second question for him. The answer to the third question quite clearly is no. We are dealing with high-level offenders in a much tougher way than the previous Government. The reforms target only those people at the lower end with minor breaches. What occurred last week was totally and completely unacceptable in every shape and form. Under existing Department of Justice policy, there is no way that that offender should still have been out in the community. For a range of other reasons, which I am sure will come out in the review, that offender should not have been at large, should not have been on parole as of earlier this year and certainly should not have been on parole in August this year. Further than that, he should not have been bailed on an earlier charge by the police. It is completely unacceptable and is nothing to do with government policy. It is about the management of that offender by the Department of Justice.
(2) Can the minister also confirm that the other administrative reforms outlined, including improving access to bail and releasing prisoners at their earliest release date, are also currently in place? (3) Does the minister acknowledge that the consequences of these policies have been to allow high-risk offenders to return to the streets and remain there on either parole or bail? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: (1)-(3) The Leader of the Opposition has been quite deceptive in that question. Clearly any reforms have been targeted at low-risk offenders, not high-risk offenders. The answer to the first question is no. I will seek some further information on the answer to the second question for him. The answer to the third question quite clearly is no. We are dealing with high-level offenders in a much tougher way than the previous Government. The reforms target only those people at the lower end with minor breaches. What occurred last week was totally and completely unacceptable in every shape and form. Under existing Department of Justice policy, there is no way that that offender should still have been out in the community. For a range of other reasons, which I am sure will come out in the review, that offender should not have been at large, should not have been on parole as of earlier this year and certainly should not have been on parole in August this year. Further than that, he should not have been bailed on an earlier charge by the police. It is completely unacceptable and is nothing to do with government policy. It is about the management of that offender by the Department of Justice.
(3) Does the minister acknowledge that the consequences of these policies have been to allow high-risk offenders to return to the streets and remain there on either parole or bail? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: (1)-(3) The Leader of the Opposition has been quite deceptive in that question. Clearly any reforms have been targeted at low-risk offenders, not high-risk offenders. The answer to the first question is no. I will seek some further information on the answer to the second question for him. The answer to the third question quite clearly is no. We are dealing with high-level offenders in a much tougher way than the previous Government. The reforms target only those people at the lower end with minor breaches. What occurred last week was totally and completely unacceptable in every shape and form. Under existing Department of Justice policy, there is no way that that offender should still have been out in the community. For a range of other reasons, which I am sure will come out in the review, that offender should not have been at large, should not have been on parole as of earlier this year and certainly should not have been on parole in August this year. Further than that, he should not have been bailed on an earlier charge by the police. It is completely unacceptable and is nothing to do with government policy. It is about the management of that offender by the Department of Justice.
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: (1)-(3) The Leader of the Opposition has been quite deceptive in that question. Clearly any reforms have been targeted at low-risk offenders, not high-risk offenders. The answer to the first question is no. I will seek some further information on the answer to the second question for him. The answer to the third question quite clearly is no. We are dealing with high-level offenders in a much tougher way than the previous Government. The reforms target only those people at the lower end with minor breaches. What occurred last week was totally and completely unacceptable in every shape and form. Under existing Department of Justice policy, there is no way that that offender should still have been out in the community. For a range of other reasons, which I am sure will come out in the review, that offender should not have been at large, should not have been on parole as of earlier this year and certainly should not have been on parole in August this year. Further than that, he should not have been bailed on an earlier charge by the police. It is completely unacceptable and is nothing to do with government policy. It is about the management of that offender by the Department of Justice.
(1)-(3) The Leader of the Opposition has been quite deceptive in that question. Clearly any reforms have been targeted at low-risk offenders, not high-risk offenders. The answer to the first question is no. I will seek some further information on the answer to the second question for him. The answer to the third question quite clearly is no. We are dealing with high-level offenders in a much tougher way than the previous Government. The reforms target only those people at the lower end with minor breaches. What occurred last week was totally and completely unacceptable in every shape and form. Under existing Department of Justice policy, there is no way that that offender should still have been out in the community. For a range of other reasons, which I am sure will come out in the review, that offender should not have been at large, should not have been on parole as of earlier this year and certainly should not have been on parole in August this year. Further than that, he should not have been bailed on an earlier charge by the police. It is completely unacceptable and is nothing to do with government policy. It is about the management of that offender by the Department of Justice.
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.