A parliamentary question regarding media identification of a juvenile offender. The question was not answered due to breaches of standing orders and being misdirected to the wrong minister.

AnsweredQoN 624Legislative Council
Asked
20 August 2004
Portfolio
minister representing the Attorney General

QuestionView source ↗

Regarding the media coverage on 20 July 2004 of a nine-year-old alleged offender who was identified in both the print and electronic media - (1) Has The West Australian breached the laws governing juveniles in the media by publishing the photographs? (2) Has The West Australian breached the laws governing identifying juveniles in the media by publishing the names of both his mother and grandmother? (3) Has the local television station breached the laws governing identifying juveniles in the media by broadcasting an interview with the alleged child offender? (4) If yes to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps is the Government taking to enforce the law with regard to this case? (5) If no to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps will the Government take to reform the law so this kind of reporting cannot be repeated? (6) Does the Attorney General support the action of The West Australian and the television station? The PRESIDENT: I do not believe that the bulk of that question is within the standing orders. It may be that the latter part of it could be answered if the Government chose to, but certainly in respect of legal opinions it is not. Hon NICK GRIFFITHS

AnswerView source ↗

I do not think this question should be answered for two reasons: first, as you have pointed out, Mr President, most of it is in breach of the standing orders, and that is not a practice I wish to encourage; and, secondly, the question, of which some notice has been given, is addressed to me representing the Minister for Justice and not the Attorney General.
(1) Has The West Australian breached the laws governing juveniles in the media by publishing the photographs? (2) Has The West Australian breached the laws governing identifying juveniles in the media by publishing the names of both his mother and grandmother? (3) Has the local television station breached the laws governing identifying juveniles in the media by broadcasting an interview with the alleged child offender? (4) If yes to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps is the Government taking to enforce the law with regard to this case? (5) If no to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps will the Government take to reform the law so this kind of reporting cannot be repeated? (6) Does the Attorney General support the action of The West Australian and the television station? The PRESIDENT: I do not believe that the bulk of that question is within the standing orders. It may be that the latter part of it could be answered if the Government chose to, but certainly in respect of legal opinions it is not. Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I do not think this question should be answered for two reasons: first, as you have pointed out, Mr President, most of it is in breach of the standing orders, and that is not a practice I wish to encourage; and, secondly, the question, of which some notice has been given, is addressed to me representing the Minister for Justice and not the Attorney General.
(2) Has The West Australian breached the laws governing identifying juveniles in the media by publishing the names of both his mother and grandmother? (3) Has the local television station breached the laws governing identifying juveniles in the media by broadcasting an interview with the alleged child offender? (4) If yes to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps is the Government taking to enforce the law with regard to this case? (5) If no to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps will the Government take to reform the law so this kind of reporting cannot be repeated? (6) Does the Attorney General support the action of The West Australian and the television station? The PRESIDENT: I do not believe that the bulk of that question is within the standing orders. It may be that the latter part of it could be answered if the Government chose to, but certainly in respect of legal opinions it is not. Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I do not think this question should be answered for two reasons: first, as you have pointed out, Mr President, most of it is in breach of the standing orders, and that is not a practice I wish to encourage; and, secondly, the question, of which some notice has been given, is addressed to me representing the Minister for Justice and not the Attorney General.
(3) Has the local television station breached the laws governing identifying juveniles in the media by broadcasting an interview with the alleged child offender? (4) If yes to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps is the Government taking to enforce the law with regard to this case? (5) If no to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps will the Government take to reform the law so this kind of reporting cannot be repeated? (6) Does the Attorney General support the action of The West Australian and the television station? The PRESIDENT: I do not believe that the bulk of that question is within the standing orders. It may be that the latter part of it could be answered if the Government chose to, but certainly in respect of legal opinions it is not. Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I do not think this question should be answered for two reasons: first, as you have pointed out, Mr President, most of it is in breach of the standing orders, and that is not a practice I wish to encourage; and, secondly, the question, of which some notice has been given, is addressed to me representing the Minister for Justice and not the Attorney General.
(4) If yes to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps is the Government taking to enforce the law with regard to this case? (5) If no to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps will the Government take to reform the law so this kind of reporting cannot be repeated? (6) Does the Attorney General support the action of The West Australian and the television station? The PRESIDENT: I do not believe that the bulk of that question is within the standing orders. It may be that the latter part of it could be answered if the Government chose to, but certainly in respect of legal opinions it is not. Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I do not think this question should be answered for two reasons: first, as you have pointed out, Mr President, most of it is in breach of the standing orders, and that is not a practice I wish to encourage; and, secondly, the question, of which some notice has been given, is addressed to me representing the Minister for Justice and not the Attorney General.
(5) If no to (1), (2) and/or (3), what steps will the Government take to reform the law so this kind of reporting cannot be repeated? (6) Does the Attorney General support the action of The West Australian and the television station? The PRESIDENT: I do not believe that the bulk of that question is within the standing orders. It may be that the latter part of it could be answered if the Government chose to, but certainly in respect of legal opinions it is not. Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I do not think this question should be answered for two reasons: first, as you have pointed out, Mr President, most of it is in breach of the standing orders, and that is not a practice I wish to encourage; and, secondly, the question, of which some notice has been given, is addressed to me representing the Minister for Justice and not the Attorney General.
(6) Does the Attorney General support the action of The West Australian and the television station? The PRESIDENT: I do not believe that the bulk of that question is within the standing orders. It may be that the latter part of it could be answered if the Government chose to, but certainly in respect of legal opinions it is not. Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I do not think this question should be answered for two reasons: first, as you have pointed out, Mr President, most of it is in breach of the standing orders, and that is not a practice I wish to encourage; and, secondly, the question, of which some notice has been given, is addressed to me representing the Minister for Justice and not the Attorney General.
The PRESIDENT: I do not believe that the bulk of that question is within the standing orders. It may be that the latter part of it could be answered if the Government chose to, but certainly in respect of legal opinions it is not. Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I do not think this question should be answered for two reasons: first, as you have pointed out, Mr President, most of it is in breach of the standing orders, and that is not a practice I wish to encourage; and, secondly, the question, of which some notice has been given, is addressed to me representing the Minister for Justice and not the Attorney General.
Hon NICK GRIFFITHS replied: I do not think this question should be answered for two reasons: first, as you have pointed out, Mr President, most of it is in breach of the standing orders, and that is not a practice I wish to encourage; and, secondly, the question, of which some notice has been given, is addressed to me representing the Minister for Justice and not the Attorney General.
I do not think this question should be answered for two reasons: first, as you have pointed out, Mr President, most of it is in breach of the standing orders, and that is not a practice I wish to encourage; and, secondly, the question, of which some notice has been given, is addressed to me representing the Minister for Justice and not the Attorney General.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more