A parliamentary question regarding the transfer of prison officer Mr. Paul Robb, focusing on whether the transfer was disciplinary and the justification for transferring employees against their will. The Attorney General denies disciplinary action but confirms the transfer was deemed appropriate due to an offence.

AnsweredQoN 290Legislative Council
Asked
10 October 2000
Portfolio
Attorney General

QuestionView source ↗

I refer to the transfer of prison officer Mr Paul Robb from Greenough Regional Prison to Roebourne Regional Prison. (1) Will the Attorney General provide statistical evidence in support of the claim that it is normal and accepted practice for employees to be transferred against their wishes? (2) Will the Attorney General verify that employees are only ever transferred against their wishes for disciplinary reasons? (3) Is the transfer of Mr Robb a disciplinary measure by the Ministry of Justice? (4) Was the recent independent review of Mr Robb’s transfer reported to be for disciplinary reasons? (5) What occurrence caused Mr Robb to be disciplined? Hon PETER FOSS

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Prisons officers, by virtue of their appointment, may be required to perform their duties at any prison in the State. This evidence is not statistically available. (2) No, employees can be transferred against their wishes if it is deemed to be in the best interests of the organisation. Public sector standards require that in such instances the employee has the opportunity to put his or her case. (3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
(1) Will the Attorney General provide statistical evidence in support of the claim that it is normal and accepted practice for employees to be transferred against their wishes? (2) Will the Attorney General verify that employees are only ever transferred against their wishes for disciplinary reasons? (3) Is the transfer of Mr Robb a disciplinary measure by the Ministry of Justice? (4) Was the recent independent review of Mr Robb’s transfer reported to be for disciplinary reasons? (5) What occurrence caused Mr Robb to be disciplined? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Prisons officers, by virtue of their appointment, may be required to perform their duties at any prison in the State. This evidence is not statistically available. (2) No, employees can be transferred against their wishes if it is deemed to be in the best interests of the organisation. Public sector standards require that in such instances the employee has the opportunity to put his or her case. (3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
(2) Will the Attorney General verify that employees are only ever transferred against their wishes for disciplinary reasons? (3) Is the transfer of Mr Robb a disciplinary measure by the Ministry of Justice? (4) Was the recent independent review of Mr Robb’s transfer reported to be for disciplinary reasons? (5) What occurrence caused Mr Robb to be disciplined? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Prisons officers, by virtue of their appointment, may be required to perform their duties at any prison in the State. This evidence is not statistically available. (2) No, employees can be transferred against their wishes if it is deemed to be in the best interests of the organisation. Public sector standards require that in such instances the employee has the opportunity to put his or her case. (3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
(3) Is the transfer of Mr Robb a disciplinary measure by the Ministry of Justice? (4) Was the recent independent review of Mr Robb’s transfer reported to be for disciplinary reasons? (5) What occurrence caused Mr Robb to be disciplined? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Prisons officers, by virtue of their appointment, may be required to perform their duties at any prison in the State. This evidence is not statistically available. (2) No, employees can be transferred against their wishes if it is deemed to be in the best interests of the organisation. Public sector standards require that in such instances the employee has the opportunity to put his or her case. (3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
(4) Was the recent independent review of Mr Robb’s transfer reported to be for disciplinary reasons? (5) What occurrence caused Mr Robb to be disciplined? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Prisons officers, by virtue of their appointment, may be required to perform their duties at any prison in the State. This evidence is not statistically available. (2) No, employees can be transferred against their wishes if it is deemed to be in the best interests of the organisation. Public sector standards require that in such instances the employee has the opportunity to put his or her case. (3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
(5) What occurrence caused Mr Robb to be disciplined? Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Prisons officers, by virtue of their appointment, may be required to perform their duties at any prison in the State. This evidence is not statistically available. (2) No, employees can be transferred against their wishes if it is deemed to be in the best interests of the organisation. Public sector standards require that in such instances the employee has the opportunity to put his or her case. (3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
Hon PETER FOSS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Prisons officers, by virtue of their appointment, may be required to perform their duties at any prison in the State. This evidence is not statistically available. (2) No, employees can be transferred against their wishes if it is deemed to be in the best interests of the organisation. Public sector standards require that in such instances the employee has the opportunity to put his or her case. (3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Prisons officers, by virtue of their appointment, may be required to perform their duties at any prison in the State. This evidence is not statistically available. (2) No, employees can be transferred against their wishes if it is deemed to be in the best interests of the organisation. Public sector standards require that in such instances the employee has the opportunity to put his or her case. (3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
(1) Prisons officers, by virtue of their appointment, may be required to perform their duties at any prison in the State. This evidence is not statistically available. (2) No, employees can be transferred against their wishes if it is deemed to be in the best interests of the organisation. Public sector standards require that in such instances the employee has the opportunity to put his or her case. (3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
(2) No, employees can be transferred against their wishes if it is deemed to be in the best interests of the organisation. Public sector standards require that in such instances the employee has the opportunity to put his or her case. (3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
(3) No. (4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
(4) Yes. (5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.
(5) Mr Robb has not been disciplined. Action to terminate Mr Robb’s employment under section 13(3) of the Prisons Act was discontinued. However, by reason of his offence, it was, for the reasons referred to previously, appropriate for him to be transferred.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more