A parliamentary question regarding a WAIRC decision, specifically concerning the lack of information on prior convictions provided to the commission by the Department of Consumer and Employment Protection (DOCEP). The question also implies potential union influence over the Minister's office, which the Minister denies.

AnsweredQoN 3058Legislative Assembly
Asked
17 August 2004
Portfolio
Consumer and Employment Protection

QuestionView source ↗

(b) if not, why not; (c) does the Minister concede that the WAIRC considered this lack of information serious enough to make mention of it in the reasons for decision by the Commission; (d) what action will the Minister take to ensure that the WARIC is fully informed of all prior convictions of defendants in the future; and (e) is this an indication that the Minister’s office is controlled by the unions?
(c) does the Minister concede that the WAIRC considered this lack of information serious enough to make mention of it in the reasons for decision by the Commission; (d) what action will the Minister take to ensure that the WARIC is fully informed of all prior convictions of defendants in the future; and (e) is this an indication that the Minister’s office is controlled by the unions?
(d) what action will the Minister take to ensure that the WARIC is fully informed of all prior convictions of defendants in the future; and (e) is this an indication that the Minister’s office is controlled by the unions?
(e) is this an indication that the Minister’s office is controlled by the unions?
(b) Not applicable. (c) The overall conduct of the case is a matter of judgement for DOCEP. The State Solicitor's Office provided advice in this regard. (d) As Minister I am not involved nor do I interfere in any investigation or prosecution matters undertaken by DOCEP. (e) No. As the Minister I am not involved in inquiries or prosecutions regardless of whether they relate to unions, employees or others.
(c) The overall conduct of the case is a matter of judgement for DOCEP. The State Solicitor's Office provided advice in this regard. (d) As Minister I am not involved nor do I interfere in any investigation or prosecution matters undertaken by DOCEP. (e) No. As the Minister I am not involved in inquiries or prosecutions regardless of whether they relate to unions, employees or others.
(d) As Minister I am not involved nor do I interfere in any investigation or prosecution matters undertaken by DOCEP. (e) No. As the Minister I am not involved in inquiries or prosecutions regardless of whether they relate to unions, employees or others.
(e) No. As the Minister I am not involved in inquiries or prosecutions regardless of whether they relate to unions, employees or others.

AnswerView source ↗

Answered
14 September 2004
Responded by
Minister for Consumer and Employment Protection
Response time
28 days
(a) It is not clear what the question means by ?investigate?. The Department of Consumer and Employment Protection (DOCEP) brought the application to suspend the right of entry permits and was represented by the State Solicitor's Office. I am advised that the application related specifically to one incident and evidence was consequently restricted to that substantive matter.
(b) Not applicable.
(c) The overall conduct of the case is a matter of judgement for DOCEP. The State Solicitor's Office provided advice in this regard.
(d) As Minister I am not involved nor do I interfere in any investigation or prosecution matters undertaken by DOCEP.
(e) No. As the Minister I am not involved in inquiries or prosecutions regardless of whether they relate to unions, employees or others.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more