❓ Question regarding the management-initiated retirement of Mr. Albert and the Premier's handling of the situation, specifically why the minister wasn't held accountable. The Premier defends the decision, citing Mr. Albert's own sense of responsibility.
AnsweredQoN 913Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PAUL ALBERT - MANAGEMENT-INITIATED RETIREMENT
I have a supplementary question. Given that the Premier accepted Mr Albert’s version of events, and Mr Albert has said that he told the minister three times, why was he sacked instead of the minister? Mr A.J. CARPENTER
I have a supplementary question. Given that the Premier accepted Mr Albert’s version of events, and Mr Albert has said that he told the minister three times, why was he sacked instead of the minister? Mr A.J. CARPENTER
AnswerView source ↗
I think I have already answered the question. The Leader of the Opposition is using the word “sacked”. Mr Albert took a management-initiated retirement. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I think I have already answered the question. The Leader of the Opposition is using the word “sacked”. Mr Albert took a management-initiated retirement. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
I think I have already answered the question. The Leader of the Opposition is using the word “sacked”. Mr Albert took a management-initiated retirement. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I think I have already answered the question. The Leader of the Opposition is using the word “sacked”. Mr Albert took a management-initiated retirement. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
I think I have already answered the question. The Leader of the Opposition is using the word “sacked”. Mr Albert took a management-initiated retirement. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr P.D. Omodei : It was increasingly obvious you wanted him gone. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I think that Mr Albert is a very good man. We were in a very difficult circumstance - Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr P.D. Omodei : He told the minister three times. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : He did not tell me that. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In fairness to Mr Albert and the Minister for Education and Training, if the Leader of the Opposition acquaints himself with Mr Albert’s submission to the Select Committee into the Department of Education and Training, he will see that on the occasions Mr Albert was talking about - at least as I understand it - the references to matters the Corruption and Crime Commission was looking at were, if anything, perfunctory corridor conversations. There was no detail provided to the minister, which accords perfectly with what Mr Albert told me; that is, that he had been unable to provide any detail - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr P.D. Omodei : Why didn’t you ask him about it? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The CCC produced the report that was the genesis of our meeting. We discussed the relative degrees of responsibility, and it was because Mr Albert felt that he had been unable to apprise the minister of the detail of the inquiry that the responsibility was ultimately his. He felt particularly disappointed that the department had allowed a teacher who had a conviction for an offence involving a young girl to continue teaching, and he felt a deep degree of responsibility for that matter. There was nothing inconsistent between what Mr Albert told me in our meeting and the position that I have put. He told me that he felt constrained and unable to provide the minister with details. He was very frustrated by that matter, and he felt a degree, should I say, of distress, because it was obvious to us, as we spoke, what the ramifications were.
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.