❓ Mr. Brown questions the Justice Minister regarding a review of inquiries conducted under Section 9 of the Prisons Act 1981, specifically inquiring about weaknesses, bias, and integrity. The Minister's response details the review's findings and the decision not to pursue further action, citing confidentiality.
AnsweredQoN 826Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
826. Mr BROWN to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Justice:
(1) Has Mr Frank Hedges conducted a review of the inquiries conducted under Section 9 of the Prisons Act 1981?
(2) Has the review revealed -
(a) weaknesses;
(b) faults;
(c) procedural unfairness;
(d) bias; and/or
(e) prejudice,
in the conduct of the inquiry?
(3) Did the review find the Section 9 inquiries were conducted -
(a) with the highest integrity; and/or
(b) with impartially; and/or
(c) without outside influence?
(4) Did the review of the Section 9 inquiries reach the conclusion that nothing untoward, unethical or wrong occurred in the conduct of those inquiries?
(5) If so, will the Minister table a copy of the review?
(6) If not, why not?
(1) Has Mr Frank Hedges conducted a review of the inquiries conducted under Section 9 of the Prisons Act 1981?
(2) Has the review revealed -
(a) weaknesses;
(b) faults;
(c) procedural unfairness;
(d) bias; and/or
(e) prejudice,
in the conduct of the inquiry?
(3) Did the review find the Section 9 inquiries were conducted -
(a) with the highest integrity; and/or
(b) with impartially; and/or
(c) without outside influence?
(4) Did the review of the Section 9 inquiries reach the conclusion that nothing untoward, unethical or wrong occurred in the conduct of those inquiries?
(5) If so, will the Minister table a copy of the review?
(6) If not, why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
23 November 2000
Response time
42 days
The Minister Replied:
The Minister for Justice supplied the following reply:
(1) Mr Frank Hedges was contracted in February 1999 to investigate the inquiries conducted under Section 9 of the Prisons Act 1991 and related disciplinary proceedings.
(2-4) Mr Hedges reviewed seven matters from February 1999 to April 2000. Mr Hedges methodology consisted of reading relevant files and transcripts of Court proceedings, seeking legal advice, interviews with complainants and other people who had relevant knowledge of the matters under inquiry and extensive evaluation of all events.
The review found that some matters could be dismissed and other matters may merit further enquiry under the Public Sector Management Act 1994. The Director General took careful consideration of the officer's submission in defence of the allegations and took legal opinion on the recommendations.
It was considered that, due to the detailed nature of the review, it was unlikely that a further enquiry would be able to further clarify or substantiate the suspected breaches. Where evidence of suspected breaches was obtained, under the circumstances, advice indicated these breaches were not likely to result in significant sanctions if pursued and not serious enough to warrant further action.
On this basis, the Director General has decided not to pursue further action under the Public Sector Management Act 1994.
(5) No
(6) As a matter of policy, the report is treated as a confidential report for the Director General. It is an exempt matter under clause 5(1)(b) to Schedule 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 1992.
The Minister for Justice supplied the following reply:
(1) Mr Frank Hedges was contracted in February 1999 to investigate the inquiries conducted under Section 9 of the Prisons Act 1991 and related disciplinary proceedings.
(2-4) Mr Hedges reviewed seven matters from February 1999 to April 2000. Mr Hedges methodology consisted of reading relevant files and transcripts of Court proceedings, seeking legal advice, interviews with complainants and other people who had relevant knowledge of the matters under inquiry and extensive evaluation of all events.
The review found that some matters could be dismissed and other matters may merit further enquiry under the Public Sector Management Act 1994. The Director General took careful consideration of the officer's submission in defence of the allegations and took legal opinion on the recommendations.
It was considered that, due to the detailed nature of the review, it was unlikely that a further enquiry would be able to further clarify or substantiate the suspected breaches. Where evidence of suspected breaches was obtained, under the circumstances, advice indicated these breaches were not likely to result in significant sanctions if pursued and not serious enough to warrant further action.
On this basis, the Director General has decided not to pursue further action under the Public Sector Management Act 1994.
(5) No
(6) As a matter of policy, the report is treated as a confidential report for the Director General. It is an exempt matter under clause 5(1)(b) to Schedule 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 1992.
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.