❓ A parliamentary question addresses potential breaches of confidentiality regarding Brookdale residents' medical records between the Department of Environmental Protection and the Department of Health, specifically concerning blood-lead test results. The Minister acknowledges the seriousness of the matter and outlines actions taken.
AnsweredQoN 426Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to alarming reports that confidential medical records of Brookdale residents were passed between the Department of Environmental Protection and the Department of Health. (1) How many people’s records were passed between the departments or were the subject of discussions between officers of the departments, and have all the affected people now been informed that this was the case? (2) What action has been taken against the staff involved in the breaches of confidentiality? (3) Can the minister confirm that the Labor member of the Legislative Assembly for Southern River received one child’s test results before the family concerned had been notified? Dr J.M. EDWARDS
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
(1) How many people’s records were passed between the departments or were the subject of discussions between officers of the departments, and have all the affected people now been informed that this was the case? (2) What action has been taken against the staff involved in the breaches of confidentiality? (3) Can the minister confirm that the Labor member of the Legislative Assembly for Southern River received one child’s test results before the family concerned had been notified? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
(2) What action has been taken against the staff involved in the breaches of confidentiality? (3) Can the minister confirm that the Labor member of the Legislative Assembly for Southern River received one child’s test results before the family concerned had been notified? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
(3) Can the minister confirm that the Labor member of the Legislative Assembly for Southern River received one child’s test results before the family concerned had been notified? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
(1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
(1) How many people’s records were passed between the departments or were the subject of discussions between officers of the departments, and have all the affected people now been informed that this was the case? (2) What action has been taken against the staff involved in the breaches of confidentiality? (3) Can the minister confirm that the Labor member of the Legislative Assembly for Southern River received one child’s test results before the family concerned had been notified? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
(2) What action has been taken against the staff involved in the breaches of confidentiality? (3) Can the minister confirm that the Labor member of the Legislative Assembly for Southern River received one child’s test results before the family concerned had been notified? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
(3) Can the minister confirm that the Labor member of the Legislative Assembly for Southern River received one child’s test results before the family concerned had been notified? Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
Dr J.M. EDWARDS replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
(1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. This is a very important and serious matter. In some ways, though, the question would be better directed to the Minister for Health because the Department of Health has been convening a daily teleconference between health department officers and environmental protection department officers to deal with issues arising from Brookdale. Clearly, confidentiality is a very serious issue; as a former medical practitioner, I know about that only too well. I was horrified when I heard that a community member had been told by one of my departmental staff the results of a second blood test on their child ahead of that person knowing. I spoke to the chief executive officer about that matter. We are amending the code of conduct to reinforce confidentiality measures and to ensure that it does not happen again. The staff member concerned has been counselled. He now realises the seriousness of what happened and recognises the error of his ways. In the report to me, he has apologised. These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
These issues are very difficult. Five hundred blood-lead test results came through to us as a result of issues in Brookdale. To my knowledge, three of those results indicated higher blood-lead levels than would be anticipated in a normal population. As an aside, I am very pleased that, generally speaking, the lead levels are much lower than those found in a comparative population. When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
When certain individuals are in the media - we have seen reports and photographs of children identified with high blood-lead levels - and as departmental officers discuss the general situation, there is some inevitability that the identity of individuals will be known. I have said that I would much prefer that people talk about individual X with a certain blood-lead level, and outline what is being done. Obviously, it is important that the health and environment departments work closely together. When abnormally high levels are involved, people need to be sent into households and to the local environment to test exposure levels leading to high blood-lead levels. That is being done. Departmental officials met and communicated only to ensure that the departments operate in tandem to truly get to the bottom of the problem. I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
I correct the member: there is no suggestion that records are being passed. In the few instances of which I am aware, results have been discussed and a follow-up guaranteed to ensure that we get to the bottom of every case with an abnormally high blood-lead level.
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.