❓ Mr. Watson questions Premier Barnett about reduced ex gratia payments to St Andrew's Hostel abuse victims due to prior compensation, accusing him of raising hopes only to disappoint. Barnett defends the policy, citing prior statements and application form clarity.
AnsweredQoN 597Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ST ANDREW'S HOSTEL, KATANNING — EX
GRATIA PAYMENTS
597. Mr P.B. WATSON to the
Premier:
Last year the Premier encouraged
victims of sexual abuse at St Andrew's Hostel, Katanning, to apply for
an ex gratia payment of up to $45 000.
(1) Why have 31 of these victims had their ex gratia
payments cut for having received criminal, Redress WA or other compensation
payments, such as my constituent Todd Jefferis, who received money in 1991?
(2) Why did the
Premier personally lift their hopes, only to then kick them in the guts?
GRATIA PAYMENTS
597. Mr P.B. WATSON to the
Premier:
Last year the Premier encouraged
victims of sexual abuse at St Andrew's Hostel, Katanning, to apply for
an ex gratia payment of up to $45 000.
(1) Why have 31 of these victims had their ex gratia
payments cut for having received criminal, Redress WA or other compensation
payments, such as my constituent Todd Jefferis, who received money in 1991?
(2) Why did the
Premier personally lift their hopes, only to then kick them in the guts?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2) As if I, or anyone
in this chamber, would kick in the guts a victim of child abuse. As if anyone
would.
Mr
P.B. Watson : Don't you start. You didn't even come to meet
them when they came all the way to Perth. You're weak.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Albany, I call you to order for the first time. Let the
Premier answer the question.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : I would think that everyone in this house and everyone in Western
Australia has the greatest sympathy for those children who were in the care of
the state in a government hostel and were abused, some repeatedly. It is an
appalling situation, and it was this government that set up the Blaxell inquiry
immediately —
Mr
P.B. Watson : Only because we asked you to!
The
SPEAKER : Member for Albany!
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : We set it up, and the Blaxell inquiry came down with six or
so recommendations. It did not recommend an ex gratia or compensation payment —
Mr
P.B. Watson : It wasn't in the terms!
The
SPEAKER : Member for Albany! I call you to order for the second time. I know
you are passionate about this, but let the Premier answer. You can ask a
supplementary question.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : An ex gratia payment scheme or compensation, if you like, was
not recommended by the Blaxell inquiry, but this government decided to set up
an ex gratia payment similar to that under the Redress WA scheme. The maximum
payment set by this government under the Redress WA scheme was $45 000. As I and
others have said repeatedly, that in no way compensates people who were abused
as children. However, it is recognition from this generation of the harm they
came to. It is a payment, but it is not compensation and it does not pretend to
be so in any way. When the issue came up and I was asked questions and I
commented, I made it clear that payments made under Redress would be taken into
account —
Mr
P.B. Watson : No, you did not!
Mr C.J. BARNETT :
Yes, I did. In Hansard I made it very clear that there would not be a
doubling up, in a sense. If someone had received a payment under Redress, it
would be taken into account for the compensation or ex gratia payment they
would receive.
Dr A.D. Buti interjected.
The SPEAKER : Member
for Armadale, I formally call you to order for the second time today.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : I
refer to the Hansard record of 13 November 2012; I specifically said in
answer to the question —
the $45 000 —
That is referring to the Katanning scheme —
is not in addition to Redress.
Some of those victims at St Andrew's have, I understand, received
compensation or payment under the Redress scheme, so this is not a doubling; it
is not —
Mr P.B. Watson interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Albany, you can have a supplementary question. Finish off, Premier.
Mr C.J. BARNETT :
People from St Andrew's Hostel were given the opportunity of applying
for compensation relating to their particular circumstance—if you like,
the Blaxell-related compensation—and the guidelines under part 4 state —
In making an assessment, the
assessor is to also take account of any awards of compensation (including
Criminal Injuries Compensation), damages or ex gratia payment that the
applicant has received or will receive, before the offer is finalised
In at least two of three places on the application form it
was made very clear that whatever was received following the Blaxell inquiry
would be no more than $45 000, and money received under any other scheme would
be taken into account. It is very clear. In my comments in 2012, I referred to
the Redress WA scheme. The issue of criminal compensation has arisen and some
of these people have received that payment. The principle is the same and it
was clearly outlined in the application form. No-one today in this house or
anywhere else can correct the wrongs that were inflicted on these young men and
perhaps also some girls. No-one can do that, but I have been absolutely
consistent in what was offered and delivered, and I made it clear in this
Parliament and publicly. This was not a doubling of the Redress WA scheme.
in this chamber, would kick in the guts a victim of child abuse. As if anyone
would.
Mr
P.B. Watson : Don't you start. You didn't even come to meet
them when they came all the way to Perth. You're weak.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Albany, I call you to order for the first time. Let the
Premier answer the question.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : I would think that everyone in this house and everyone in Western
Australia has the greatest sympathy for those children who were in the care of
the state in a government hostel and were abused, some repeatedly. It is an
appalling situation, and it was this government that set up the Blaxell inquiry
immediately —
Mr
P.B. Watson : Only because we asked you to!
The
SPEAKER : Member for Albany!
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : We set it up, and the Blaxell inquiry came down with six or
so recommendations. It did not recommend an ex gratia or compensation payment —
Mr
P.B. Watson : It wasn't in the terms!
The
SPEAKER : Member for Albany! I call you to order for the second time. I know
you are passionate about this, but let the Premier answer. You can ask a
supplementary question.
Mr
C.J. BARNETT : An ex gratia payment scheme or compensation, if you like, was
not recommended by the Blaxell inquiry, but this government decided to set up
an ex gratia payment similar to that under the Redress WA scheme. The maximum
payment set by this government under the Redress WA scheme was $45 000. As I and
others have said repeatedly, that in no way compensates people who were abused
as children. However, it is recognition from this generation of the harm they
came to. It is a payment, but it is not compensation and it does not pretend to
be so in any way. When the issue came up and I was asked questions and I
commented, I made it clear that payments made under Redress would be taken into
account —
Mr
P.B. Watson : No, you did not!
Mr C.J. BARNETT :
Yes, I did. In Hansard I made it very clear that there would not be a
doubling up, in a sense. If someone had received a payment under Redress, it
would be taken into account for the compensation or ex gratia payment they
would receive.
Dr A.D. Buti interjected.
The SPEAKER : Member
for Armadale, I formally call you to order for the second time today.
Mr C.J. BARNETT : I
refer to the Hansard record of 13 November 2012; I specifically said in
answer to the question —
the $45 000 —
That is referring to the Katanning scheme —
is not in addition to Redress.
Some of those victims at St Andrew's have, I understand, received
compensation or payment under the Redress scheme, so this is not a doubling; it
is not —
Mr P.B. Watson interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Albany, you can have a supplementary question. Finish off, Premier.
Mr C.J. BARNETT :
People from St Andrew's Hostel were given the opportunity of applying
for compensation relating to their particular circumstance—if you like,
the Blaxell-related compensation—and the guidelines under part 4 state —
In making an assessment, the
assessor is to also take account of any awards of compensation (including
Criminal Injuries Compensation), damages or ex gratia payment that the
applicant has received or will receive, before the offer is finalised
In at least two of three places on the application form it
was made very clear that whatever was received following the Blaxell inquiry
would be no more than $45 000, and money received under any other scheme would
be taken into account. It is very clear. In my comments in 2012, I referred to
the Redress WA scheme. The issue of criminal compensation has arisen and some
of these people have received that payment. The principle is the same and it
was clearly outlined in the application form. No-one today in this house or
anywhere else can correct the wrongs that were inflicted on these young men and
perhaps also some girls. No-one can do that, but I have been absolutely
consistent in what was offered and delivered, and I made it clear in this
Parliament and publicly. This was not a doubling of the Redress WA scheme.
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.