❓ Question regarding perceived contradiction between the Attorney General and Premier on trespass laws related to farming properties and potential review of legislation with increased penalties for trespassers. The Attorney General denies being at odds with the Premier and clarifies his position on strengthening restraining orders.
AnsweredQoN 131Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ANIMAL ACTIVISM
131. Mr R.S. LOVE to the Attorney General:
I refer to the answer the Attorney
General gave in the other place yesterday that the Criminal Code adequately
deals with the issue of trespass, which is in direct contradiction to the
Premier's remarks in this place yesterday that he was seeking to review
legislation related to trespass laws for farming properties.
(1) Why is the Attorney General at
odds with the Premier on this issue?
(2) Was the Attorney General aware
of the Premier's intention to review trespass laws?
(3) Will the
Attorney General now fall into line and commit to reviewing trespass laws with
a view to increasing penalties for those who trespass on farming land?
131. Mr R.S. LOVE to the Attorney General:
I refer to the answer the Attorney
General gave in the other place yesterday that the Criminal Code adequately
deals with the issue of trespass, which is in direct contradiction to the
Premier's remarks in this place yesterday that he was seeking to review
legislation related to trespass laws for farming properties.
(1) Why is the Attorney General at
odds with the Premier on this issue?
(2) Was the Attorney General aware
of the Premier's intention to review trespass laws?
(3) Will the
Attorney General now fall into line and commit to reviewing trespass laws with
a view to increasing penalties for those who trespass on farming land?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(3) The
member did not read out the whole of the answer. He should read out the whole
of the answer. In the answer, I said that
we are contemplating changing the Restraining Orders Act 1997. We have the
trespass act. He had to clip the answer because it did not fit the
frame-up. As the member will know—I hope his supplementary question will go to the full answer—I am contemplating
changing the Restraining Orders Act . Here is the deficiency. A person
could be charged with trespass and be taken before the court and fined. It does
not matter if we keep doubling or trebling the fine; there is a discretion that
they will be fined. What the farmers want and what the community wants is a cessation
of this aberrant conduct. While we are thinking about contemplating changing
the Restraining Orders Act, we need to make it like some other offences so that
when one is convicted of trespass, the court can impose a misconduct
restraining order under the Restraining Orders Act to bar anyone from
trespassing on any property in Western Australia for the next five years. If
they commit any act of trespass in the next five years, they will then be
arrested, thrown in the cells and brought before the court. The trespass
penalty is adequate but it is insufficient in that it does not bind an offender
from repeating the offence. When these no-gooders trespass on the farmers'
property and livestream from their stock sheds, the farmers want those persons
permanently banned. We are going to do it. That is what I am contemplating. I have
never been at odds with the Premier. The Premier and I are at one on our strict
law and order agenda.
member did not read out the whole of the answer. He should read out the whole
of the answer. In the answer, I said that
we are contemplating changing the Restraining Orders Act 1997. We have the
trespass act. He had to clip the answer because it did not fit the
frame-up. As the member will know—I hope his supplementary question will go to the full answer—I am contemplating
changing the Restraining Orders Act . Here is the deficiency. A person
could be charged with trespass and be taken before the court and fined. It does
not matter if we keep doubling or trebling the fine; there is a discretion that
they will be fined. What the farmers want and what the community wants is a cessation
of this aberrant conduct. While we are thinking about contemplating changing
the Restraining Orders Act, we need to make it like some other offences so that
when one is convicted of trespass, the court can impose a misconduct
restraining order under the Restraining Orders Act to bar anyone from
trespassing on any property in Western Australia for the next five years. If
they commit any act of trespass in the next five years, they will then be
arrested, thrown in the cells and brought before the court. The trespass
penalty is adequate but it is insufficient in that it does not bind an offender
from repeating the offence. When these no-gooders trespass on the farmers'
property and livestream from their stock sheds, the farmers want those persons
permanently banned. We are going to do it. That is what I am contemplating. I have
never been at odds with the Premier. The Premier and I are at one on our strict
law and order agenda.
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.