❓ The Attorney General declines to answer when he informed the Premier or Labor Party president about Mr. Burkett being subject to a telephone tap, citing confidentiality and the need to protect the integrity of the Corruption and Crime Commission's investigations.
AnsweredQoN 613Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I have a supplementary question. When did the Attorney General first inform or discuss with the Premier or the president of the Labor Party that Mr Burkett was subject to a telephone tap? Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
Powers such as those contained in the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act require that these matters be treated with the appropriate discretion. As the Attorney General of this State, I am privy to a whole host of matters. They relate to a number of warrants in respect of serious criminals in this State that only the Attorney General can sign, which take people out of prison, for instance. I am also aware of a range of matters concerning the judiciary. Confidentiality is respected and required in those matters. That is the reason that, when Mr Morfesse rang me, I said to him that I would not be confirming whether or not a telecommunications intercept notice had been given to me under this legislation. I intend that the Corruption and Crime Commission, which reports to me as the Attorney General, into which we have put a lot of resources, and which has been given extraordinary powers, be able to fulfil its function properly. For it to be able to fulfil that function, the public debate on these matters should, in my view, be circumscribed. Nobody, whether he be the Leader of the Opposition, an opposition member, a government member, a staff member, a drug trafficker or the most lowly criminal in the State, should be tipped off or advised in any way that these extraordinary powers will be used. I have followed that view.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: Powers such as those contained in the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act require that these matters be treated with the appropriate discretion. As the Attorney General of this State, I am privy to a whole host of matters. They relate to a number of warrants in respect of serious criminals in this State that only the Attorney General can sign, which take people out of prison, for instance. I am also aware of a range of matters concerning the judiciary. Confidentiality is respected and required in those matters. That is the reason that, when Mr Morfesse rang me, I said to him that I would not be confirming whether or not a telecommunications intercept notice had been given to me under this legislation. I intend that the Corruption and Crime Commission, which reports to me as the Attorney General, into which we have put a lot of resources, and which has been given extraordinary powers, be able to fulfil its function properly. For it to be able to fulfil that function, the public debate on these matters should, in my view, be circumscribed. Nobody, whether he be the Leader of the Opposition, an opposition member, a government member, a staff member, a drug trafficker or the most lowly criminal in the State, should be tipped off or advised in any way that these extraordinary powers will be used. I have followed that view.
Powers such as those contained in the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act require that these matters be treated with the appropriate discretion. As the Attorney General of this State, I am privy to a whole host of matters. They relate to a number of warrants in respect of serious criminals in this State that only the Attorney General can sign, which take people out of prison, for instance. I am also aware of a range of matters concerning the judiciary. Confidentiality is respected and required in those matters. That is the reason that, when Mr Morfesse rang me, I said to him that I would not be confirming whether or not a telecommunications intercept notice had been given to me under this legislation. I intend that the Corruption and Crime Commission, which reports to me as the Attorney General, into which we have put a lot of resources, and which has been given extraordinary powers, be able to fulfil its function properly. For it to be able to fulfil that function, the public debate on these matters should, in my view, be circumscribed. Nobody, whether he be the Leader of the Opposition, an opposition member, a government member, a staff member, a drug trafficker or the most lowly criminal in the State, should be tipped off or advised in any way that these extraordinary powers will be used. I have followed that view.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: Powers such as those contained in the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act require that these matters be treated with the appropriate discretion. As the Attorney General of this State, I am privy to a whole host of matters. They relate to a number of warrants in respect of serious criminals in this State that only the Attorney General can sign, which take people out of prison, for instance. I am also aware of a range of matters concerning the judiciary. Confidentiality is respected and required in those matters. That is the reason that, when Mr Morfesse rang me, I said to him that I would not be confirming whether or not a telecommunications intercept notice had been given to me under this legislation. I intend that the Corruption and Crime Commission, which reports to me as the Attorney General, into which we have put a lot of resources, and which has been given extraordinary powers, be able to fulfil its function properly. For it to be able to fulfil that function, the public debate on these matters should, in my view, be circumscribed. Nobody, whether he be the Leader of the Opposition, an opposition member, a government member, a staff member, a drug trafficker or the most lowly criminal in the State, should be tipped off or advised in any way that these extraordinary powers will be used. I have followed that view.
Powers such as those contained in the Telecommunications (Interception) Western Australia Act require that these matters be treated with the appropriate discretion. As the Attorney General of this State, I am privy to a whole host of matters. They relate to a number of warrants in respect of serious criminals in this State that only the Attorney General can sign, which take people out of prison, for instance. I am also aware of a range of matters concerning the judiciary. Confidentiality is respected and required in those matters. That is the reason that, when Mr Morfesse rang me, I said to him that I would not be confirming whether or not a telecommunications intercept notice had been given to me under this legislation. I intend that the Corruption and Crime Commission, which reports to me as the Attorney General, into which we have put a lot of resources, and which has been given extraordinary powers, be able to fulfil its function properly. For it to be able to fulfil that function, the public debate on these matters should, in my view, be circumscribed. Nobody, whether he be the Leader of the Opposition, an opposition member, a government member, a staff member, a drug trafficker or the most lowly criminal in the State, should be tipped off or advised in any way that these extraordinary powers will be used. I have followed that view.
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.