❓ Premier Gallop defends the Minister for Health against accusations from the Leader of the Opposition regarding the Mickelberg case, dismissing the claims as baseless political maneuvering and highlighting the Minister's integrity.
AnsweredQoN 1070Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the Premier to the judgment of Chief Justice Malcolm, Justice Ipp and Justice Wheeler in the 1998 Court of Criminal Appeal case of Peter Mickelberg v the Queen and Others, which in part states - The most powerful individual factors rebutting the case made out by the appellants are the testimony of Mrs Holz and Kucera . . . The West Australian this morning reported a statement by the Minister for Health that - I was a peripheral player in this. I was a waiter. I brought some food in for people who said they wanted food. How does the Premier reconcile the court’s judgment with the Minister for Health’s statement? Dr GALLOP
AnswerView source ↗
There is absolutely no contradiction. The Leader of the Opposition is pursuing his twisted logic in this matter to make what can only be described a base political point. The Minister for Health was not involved in the original trial of the Mickelbergs, but he appeared before the Court of Criminal Appeal in 1998, which was a significant number of years after the first trial. During that case, he spoke of his recollections of the events in the Belmont Police Station in 1982. Obviously, the recollections he gave were very impressive to the judges sitting on that case. None of the literature about the Mickelberg stitch, as it has become known in Western Australian political history, mentions the name of the current Minister for Health. All of a sudden, he is on the front page of The West Australian, and the Leader of the Opposition is raising issues in the Parliament. It is often said that there are two theories of history: the cock-up theory of history and the conspiracy theory of history. I think there is another theory of history - the coincidence theory. Mr Kucera was at the Belmont Police Station at that time. He gave the court his recollections of those matters. Obviously, his delivery of those recollections impressed the judges at work at that time. No accusations have been made against the Minister for Health about this matter. No such accusations were made in the affidavit of Mr Lewandowski, in any of the literature about this matter that has been released in Western Australia in recent years, or in the various court cases about this matter. There is no justification whatsoever for the position taken by the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question: what is his accusation against the Minister for Health? What is he saying about the Minister for Health that would lead me to the conclusion that I should stand him aside? What is his accusation? He is silent. He does not have an accusation. The Leader of the Opposition’s press release on this matter states that he does not level any particular accusations against the Minister for Health. He is playing base politics on this matter. He is doing his party and the Western Australian political system a disservice, and he is reflecting on the character of someone who served the people of Western Australia for 30 years in one of the most difficult jobs in this State. Some of my proudest moments since becoming Premier of this State have been sitting in a Cabinet with someone of the stature of the Minister for Health. I am proud to sit in a Cabinet with someone of that stature, but I am embarrassed on behalf of the people and the Parliament of Western Australia by the conduct of the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. The West Australian newspaper this morning reported the Leader of the Opposition as saying that the Minister for Health “was involved in this every step of the way”. They are the standards that the Leader of the Opposition is setting on this matter. It was interesting to hear him say on the radio this morning that Hon Doug Shave should have stood aside as a minister in the former Court Government. Does the Parliament want me to read the words of the then Minister for Energy - now Leader of the Opposition - during the parliamentary debate of that time when he rejected calls for Hon Doug Shave to stand aside from the ministry? We have someone on the opposition side of the House with double standards. We have someone on that side of the House who will not make a direct accusation against the Minister for Health, but who is using base politics to try to damage my Government. We know what parliamentary standards are all about. People will judge the Leader of the Opposition on this matter. He should make no mistake: he will get zero out of 10.
Dr GALLOP replied: There is absolutely no contradiction. The Leader of the Opposition is pursuing his twisted logic in this matter to make what can only be described a base political point. The Minister for Health was not involved in the original trial of the Mickelbergs, but he appeared before the Court of Criminal Appeal in 1998, which was a significant number of years after the first trial. During that case, he spoke of his recollections of the events in the Belmont Police Station in 1982. Obviously, the recollections he gave were very impressive to the judges sitting on that case. None of the literature about the Mickelberg stitch, as it has become known in Western Australian political history, mentions the name of the current Minister for Health. All of a sudden, he is on the front page of The West Australian, and the Leader of the Opposition is raising issues in the Parliament. It is often said that there are two theories of history: the cock-up theory of history and the conspiracy theory of history. I think there is another theory of history - the coincidence theory. Mr Kucera was at the Belmont Police Station at that time. He gave the court his recollections of those matters. Obviously, his delivery of those recollections impressed the judges at work at that time. No accusations have been made against the Minister for Health about this matter. No such accusations were made in the affidavit of Mr Lewandowski, in any of the literature about this matter that has been released in Western Australia in recent years, or in the various court cases about this matter. There is no justification whatsoever for the position taken by the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question: what is his accusation against the Minister for Health? What is he saying about the Minister for Health that would lead me to the conclusion that I should stand him aside? What is his accusation? He is silent. He does not have an accusation. The Leader of the Opposition’s press release on this matter states that he does not level any particular accusations against the Minister for Health. He is playing base politics on this matter. He is doing his party and the Western Australian political system a disservice, and he is reflecting on the character of someone who served the people of Western Australia for 30 years in one of the most difficult jobs in this State. Some of my proudest moments since becoming Premier of this State have been sitting in a Cabinet with someone of the stature of the Minister for Health. I am proud to sit in a Cabinet with someone of that stature, but I am embarrassed on behalf of the people and the Parliament of Western Australia by the conduct of the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. The West Australian newspaper this morning reported the Leader of the Opposition as saying that the Minister for Health “was involved in this every step of the way”. They are the standards that the Leader of the Opposition is setting on this matter. It was interesting to hear him say on the radio this morning that Hon Doug Shave should have stood aside as a minister in the former Court Government. Does the Parliament want me to read the words of the then Minister for Energy - now Leader of the Opposition - during the parliamentary debate of that time when he rejected calls for Hon Doug Shave to stand aside from the ministry? We have someone on the opposition side of the House with double standards. We have someone on that side of the House who will not make a direct accusation against the Minister for Health, but who is using base politics to try to damage my Government. We know what parliamentary standards are all about. People will judge the Leader of the Opposition on this matter. He should make no mistake: he will get zero out of 10.
There is absolutely no contradiction. The Leader of the Opposition is pursuing his twisted logic in this matter to make what can only be described a base political point. The Minister for Health was not involved in the original trial of the Mickelbergs, but he appeared before the Court of Criminal Appeal in 1998, which was a significant number of years after the first trial. During that case, he spoke of his recollections of the events in the Belmont Police Station in 1982. Obviously, the recollections he gave were very impressive to the judges sitting on that case. None of the literature about the Mickelberg stitch, as it has become known in Western Australian political history, mentions the name of the current Minister for Health. All of a sudden, he is on the front page of The West Australian, and the Leader of the Opposition is raising issues in the Parliament. It is often said that there are two theories of history: the cock-up theory of history and the conspiracy theory of history. I think there is another theory of history - the coincidence theory. Mr Kucera was at the Belmont Police Station at that time. He gave the court his recollections of those matters. Obviously, his delivery of those recollections impressed the judges at work at that time. No accusations have been made against the Minister for Health about this matter. No such accusations were made in the affidavit of Mr Lewandowski, in any of the literature about this matter that has been released in Western Australia in recent years, or in the various court cases about this matter. There is no justification whatsoever for the position taken by the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question: what is his accusation against the Minister for Health? What is he saying about the Minister for Health that would lead me to the conclusion that I should stand him aside? What is his accusation? He is silent. He does not have an accusation. The Leader of the Opposition’s press release on this matter states that he does not level any particular accusations against the Minister for Health. He is playing base politics on this matter. He is doing his party and the Western Australian political system a disservice, and he is reflecting on the character of someone who served the people of Western Australia for 30 years in one of the most difficult jobs in this State. Some of my proudest moments since becoming Premier of this State have been sitting in a Cabinet with someone of the stature of the Minister for Health. I am proud to sit in a Cabinet with someone of that stature, but I am embarrassed on behalf of the people and the Parliament of Western Australia by the conduct of the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. The West Australian newspaper this morning reported the Leader of the Opposition as saying that the Minister for Health “was involved in this every step of the way”. They are the standards that the Leader of the Opposition is setting on this matter. It was interesting to hear him say on the radio this morning that Hon Doug Shave should have stood aside as a minister in the former Court Government. Does the Parliament want me to read the words of the then Minister for Energy - now Leader of the Opposition - during the parliamentary debate of that time when he rejected calls for Hon Doug Shave to stand aside from the ministry? We have someone on the opposition side of the House with double standards. We have someone on that side of the House who will not make a direct accusation against the Minister for Health, but who is using base politics to try to damage my Government. We know what parliamentary standards are all about. People will judge the Leader of the Opposition on this matter. He should make no mistake: he will get zero out of 10.
The Minister for Health was not involved in the original trial of the Mickelbergs, but he appeared before the Court of Criminal Appeal in 1998, which was a significant number of years after the first trial. During that case, he spoke of his recollections of the events in the Belmont Police Station in 1982. Obviously, the recollections he gave were very impressive to the judges sitting on that case. None of the literature about the Mickelberg stitch, as it has become known in Western Australian political history, mentions the name of the current Minister for Health. All of a sudden, he is on the front page of The West Australian, and the Leader of the Opposition is raising issues in the Parliament. It is often said that there are two theories of history: the cock-up theory of history and the conspiracy theory of history. I think there is another theory of history - the coincidence theory. Mr Kucera was at the Belmont Police Station at that time. He gave the court his recollections of those matters. Obviously, his delivery of those recollections impressed the judges at work at that time. No accusations have been made against the Minister for Health about this matter. No such accusations were made in the affidavit of Mr Lewandowski, in any of the literature about this matter that has been released in Western Australia in recent years, or in the various court cases about this matter. There is no justification whatsoever for the position taken by the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question: what is his accusation against the Minister for Health? What is he saying about the Minister for Health that would lead me to the conclusion that I should stand him aside? What is his accusation? He is silent. He does not have an accusation. The Leader of the Opposition’s press release on this matter states that he does not level any particular accusations against the Minister for Health. He is playing base politics on this matter. He is doing his party and the Western Australian political system a disservice, and he is reflecting on the character of someone who served the people of Western Australia for 30 years in one of the most difficult jobs in this State. Some of my proudest moments since becoming Premier of this State have been sitting in a Cabinet with someone of the stature of the Minister for Health. I am proud to sit in a Cabinet with someone of that stature, but I am embarrassed on behalf of the people and the Parliament of Western Australia by the conduct of the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. The West Australian newspaper this morning reported the Leader of the Opposition as saying that the Minister for Health “was involved in this every step of the way”. They are the standards that the Leader of the Opposition is setting on this matter. It was interesting to hear him say on the radio this morning that Hon Doug Shave should have stood aside as a minister in the former Court Government. Does the Parliament want me to read the words of the then Minister for Energy - now Leader of the Opposition - during the parliamentary debate of that time when he rejected calls for Hon Doug Shave to stand aside from the ministry? We have someone on the opposition side of the House with double standards. We have someone on that side of the House who will not make a direct accusation against the Minister for Health, but who is using base politics to try to damage my Government. We know what parliamentary standards are all about. People will judge the Leader of the Opposition on this matter. He should make no mistake: he will get zero out of 10.
I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question: what is his accusation against the Minister for Health? What is he saying about the Minister for Health that would lead me to the conclusion that I should stand him aside? What is his accusation? He is silent. He does not have an accusation. The Leader of the Opposition’s press release on this matter states that he does not level any particular accusations against the Minister for Health. He is playing base politics on this matter. He is doing his party and the Western Australian political system a disservice, and he is reflecting on the character of someone who served the people of Western Australia for 30 years in one of the most difficult jobs in this State. Some of my proudest moments since becoming Premier of this State have been sitting in a Cabinet with someone of the stature of the Minister for Health. I am proud to sit in a Cabinet with someone of that stature, but I am embarrassed on behalf of the people and the Parliament of Western Australia by the conduct of the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. The West Australian newspaper this morning reported the Leader of the Opposition as saying that the Minister for Health “was involved in this every step of the way”. They are the standards that the Leader of the Opposition is setting on this matter. It was interesting to hear him say on the radio this morning that Hon Doug Shave should have stood aside as a minister in the former Court Government. Does the Parliament want me to read the words of the then Minister for Energy - now Leader of the Opposition - during the parliamentary debate of that time when he rejected calls for Hon Doug Shave to stand aside from the ministry? We have someone on the opposition side of the House with double standards. We have someone on that side of the House who will not make a direct accusation against the Minister for Health, but who is using base politics to try to damage my Government. We know what parliamentary standards are all about. People will judge the Leader of the Opposition on this matter. He should make no mistake: he will get zero out of 10.
Dr GALLOP replied: There is absolutely no contradiction. The Leader of the Opposition is pursuing his twisted logic in this matter to make what can only be described a base political point. The Minister for Health was not involved in the original trial of the Mickelbergs, but he appeared before the Court of Criminal Appeal in 1998, which was a significant number of years after the first trial. During that case, he spoke of his recollections of the events in the Belmont Police Station in 1982. Obviously, the recollections he gave were very impressive to the judges sitting on that case. None of the literature about the Mickelberg stitch, as it has become known in Western Australian political history, mentions the name of the current Minister for Health. All of a sudden, he is on the front page of The West Australian, and the Leader of the Opposition is raising issues in the Parliament. It is often said that there are two theories of history: the cock-up theory of history and the conspiracy theory of history. I think there is another theory of history - the coincidence theory. Mr Kucera was at the Belmont Police Station at that time. He gave the court his recollections of those matters. Obviously, his delivery of those recollections impressed the judges at work at that time. No accusations have been made against the Minister for Health about this matter. No such accusations were made in the affidavit of Mr Lewandowski, in any of the literature about this matter that has been released in Western Australia in recent years, or in the various court cases about this matter. There is no justification whatsoever for the position taken by the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question: what is his accusation against the Minister for Health? What is he saying about the Minister for Health that would lead me to the conclusion that I should stand him aside? What is his accusation? He is silent. He does not have an accusation. The Leader of the Opposition’s press release on this matter states that he does not level any particular accusations against the Minister for Health. He is playing base politics on this matter. He is doing his party and the Western Australian political system a disservice, and he is reflecting on the character of someone who served the people of Western Australia for 30 years in one of the most difficult jobs in this State. Some of my proudest moments since becoming Premier of this State have been sitting in a Cabinet with someone of the stature of the Minister for Health. I am proud to sit in a Cabinet with someone of that stature, but I am embarrassed on behalf of the people and the Parliament of Western Australia by the conduct of the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. The West Australian newspaper this morning reported the Leader of the Opposition as saying that the Minister for Health “was involved in this every step of the way”. They are the standards that the Leader of the Opposition is setting on this matter. It was interesting to hear him say on the radio this morning that Hon Doug Shave should have stood aside as a minister in the former Court Government. Does the Parliament want me to read the words of the then Minister for Energy - now Leader of the Opposition - during the parliamentary debate of that time when he rejected calls for Hon Doug Shave to stand aside from the ministry? We have someone on the opposition side of the House with double standards. We have someone on that side of the House who will not make a direct accusation against the Minister for Health, but who is using base politics to try to damage my Government. We know what parliamentary standards are all about. People will judge the Leader of the Opposition on this matter. He should make no mistake: he will get zero out of 10.
There is absolutely no contradiction. The Leader of the Opposition is pursuing his twisted logic in this matter to make what can only be described a base political point. The Minister for Health was not involved in the original trial of the Mickelbergs, but he appeared before the Court of Criminal Appeal in 1998, which was a significant number of years after the first trial. During that case, he spoke of his recollections of the events in the Belmont Police Station in 1982. Obviously, the recollections he gave were very impressive to the judges sitting on that case. None of the literature about the Mickelberg stitch, as it has become known in Western Australian political history, mentions the name of the current Minister for Health. All of a sudden, he is on the front page of The West Australian, and the Leader of the Opposition is raising issues in the Parliament. It is often said that there are two theories of history: the cock-up theory of history and the conspiracy theory of history. I think there is another theory of history - the coincidence theory. Mr Kucera was at the Belmont Police Station at that time. He gave the court his recollections of those matters. Obviously, his delivery of those recollections impressed the judges at work at that time. No accusations have been made against the Minister for Health about this matter. No such accusations were made in the affidavit of Mr Lewandowski, in any of the literature about this matter that has been released in Western Australia in recent years, or in the various court cases about this matter. There is no justification whatsoever for the position taken by the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question: what is his accusation against the Minister for Health? What is he saying about the Minister for Health that would lead me to the conclusion that I should stand him aside? What is his accusation? He is silent. He does not have an accusation. The Leader of the Opposition’s press release on this matter states that he does not level any particular accusations against the Minister for Health. He is playing base politics on this matter. He is doing his party and the Western Australian political system a disservice, and he is reflecting on the character of someone who served the people of Western Australia for 30 years in one of the most difficult jobs in this State. Some of my proudest moments since becoming Premier of this State have been sitting in a Cabinet with someone of the stature of the Minister for Health. I am proud to sit in a Cabinet with someone of that stature, but I am embarrassed on behalf of the people and the Parliament of Western Australia by the conduct of the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. The West Australian newspaper this morning reported the Leader of the Opposition as saying that the Minister for Health “was involved in this every step of the way”. They are the standards that the Leader of the Opposition is setting on this matter. It was interesting to hear him say on the radio this morning that Hon Doug Shave should have stood aside as a minister in the former Court Government. Does the Parliament want me to read the words of the then Minister for Energy - now Leader of the Opposition - during the parliamentary debate of that time when he rejected calls for Hon Doug Shave to stand aside from the ministry? We have someone on the opposition side of the House with double standards. We have someone on that side of the House who will not make a direct accusation against the Minister for Health, but who is using base politics to try to damage my Government. We know what parliamentary standards are all about. People will judge the Leader of the Opposition on this matter. He should make no mistake: he will get zero out of 10.
The Minister for Health was not involved in the original trial of the Mickelbergs, but he appeared before the Court of Criminal Appeal in 1998, which was a significant number of years after the first trial. During that case, he spoke of his recollections of the events in the Belmont Police Station in 1982. Obviously, the recollections he gave were very impressive to the judges sitting on that case. None of the literature about the Mickelberg stitch, as it has become known in Western Australian political history, mentions the name of the current Minister for Health. All of a sudden, he is on the front page of The West Australian, and the Leader of the Opposition is raising issues in the Parliament. It is often said that there are two theories of history: the cock-up theory of history and the conspiracy theory of history. I think there is another theory of history - the coincidence theory. Mr Kucera was at the Belmont Police Station at that time. He gave the court his recollections of those matters. Obviously, his delivery of those recollections impressed the judges at work at that time. No accusations have been made against the Minister for Health about this matter. No such accusations were made in the affidavit of Mr Lewandowski, in any of the literature about this matter that has been released in Western Australia in recent years, or in the various court cases about this matter. There is no justification whatsoever for the position taken by the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question: what is his accusation against the Minister for Health? What is he saying about the Minister for Health that would lead me to the conclusion that I should stand him aside? What is his accusation? He is silent. He does not have an accusation. The Leader of the Opposition’s press release on this matter states that he does not level any particular accusations against the Minister for Health. He is playing base politics on this matter. He is doing his party and the Western Australian political system a disservice, and he is reflecting on the character of someone who served the people of Western Australia for 30 years in one of the most difficult jobs in this State. Some of my proudest moments since becoming Premier of this State have been sitting in a Cabinet with someone of the stature of the Minister for Health. I am proud to sit in a Cabinet with someone of that stature, but I am embarrassed on behalf of the people and the Parliament of Western Australia by the conduct of the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. The West Australian newspaper this morning reported the Leader of the Opposition as saying that the Minister for Health “was involved in this every step of the way”. They are the standards that the Leader of the Opposition is setting on this matter. It was interesting to hear him say on the radio this morning that Hon Doug Shave should have stood aside as a minister in the former Court Government. Does the Parliament want me to read the words of the then Minister for Energy - now Leader of the Opposition - during the parliamentary debate of that time when he rejected calls for Hon Doug Shave to stand aside from the ministry? We have someone on the opposition side of the House with double standards. We have someone on that side of the House who will not make a direct accusation against the Minister for Health, but who is using base politics to try to damage my Government. We know what parliamentary standards are all about. People will judge the Leader of the Opposition on this matter. He should make no mistake: he will get zero out of 10.
I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question: what is his accusation against the Minister for Health? What is he saying about the Minister for Health that would lead me to the conclusion that I should stand him aside? What is his accusation? He is silent. He does not have an accusation. The Leader of the Opposition’s press release on this matter states that he does not level any particular accusations against the Minister for Health. He is playing base politics on this matter. He is doing his party and the Western Australian political system a disservice, and he is reflecting on the character of someone who served the people of Western Australia for 30 years in one of the most difficult jobs in this State. Some of my proudest moments since becoming Premier of this State have been sitting in a Cabinet with someone of the stature of the Minister for Health. I am proud to sit in a Cabinet with someone of that stature, but I am embarrassed on behalf of the people and the Parliament of Western Australia by the conduct of the Leader of the Opposition in this matter. The West Australian newspaper this morning reported the Leader of the Opposition as saying that the Minister for Health “was involved in this every step of the way”. They are the standards that the Leader of the Opposition is setting on this matter. It was interesting to hear him say on the radio this morning that Hon Doug Shave should have stood aside as a minister in the former Court Government. Does the Parliament want me to read the words of the then Minister for Energy - now Leader of the Opposition - during the parliamentary debate of that time when he rejected calls for Hon Doug Shave to stand aside from the ministry? We have someone on the opposition side of the House with double standards. We have someone on that side of the House who will not make a direct accusation against the Minister for Health, but who is using base politics to try to damage my Government. We know what parliamentary standards are all about. People will judge the Leader of the Opposition on this matter. He should make no mistake: he will get zero out of 10.
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.