❓ A parliamentary question regarding the appropriateness of the Attorney General and Director of Public Prosecutions posing on a confiscated motorcycle, and the Attorney General's response defending the action as a message to drug traffickers.
AnsweredQoN 927Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the photograph on the front page of The West Australian today showing a laughing Attorney General astride a Harley-Davidson motorcycle with an equally excited Director of Public Prosecutions as his pillion passenger. (1) Is it appropriate for the State’s independent public prosecutor to be so closely and publicly linked with the State’s most senior law-maker on a matter directly related to the prosecution of drug traffickers? (2) Is it appropriate for the Attorney General to make light of such a serious issue and find so much humour in the confiscation of the proceeds of such crimes? (3) How did the motorcycle arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
(1) Is it appropriate for the State’s independent public prosecutor to be so closely and publicly linked with the State’s most senior law-maker on a matter directly related to the prosecution of drug traffickers? (2) Is it appropriate for the Attorney General to make light of such a serious issue and find so much humour in the confiscation of the proceeds of such crimes? (3) How did the motorcycle arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY replied: I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
(2) Is it appropriate for the Attorney General to make light of such a serious issue and find so much humour in the confiscation of the proceeds of such crimes? (3) How did the motorcycle arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY replied: I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
(3) How did the motorcycle arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY replied: I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY replied: I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
(1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
(1) Is it appropriate for the State’s independent public prosecutor to be so closely and publicly linked with the State’s most senior law-maker on a matter directly related to the prosecution of drug traffickers? (2) Is it appropriate for the Attorney General to make light of such a serious issue and find so much humour in the confiscation of the proceeds of such crimes? (3) How did the motorcycle arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY replied: I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
(2) Is it appropriate for the Attorney General to make light of such a serious issue and find so much humour in the confiscation of the proceeds of such crimes? (3) How did the motorcycle arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY replied: I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
(3) How did the motorcycle arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY replied: I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY replied: I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
I most genuinely thank the member opposite for the question. (1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
(1)-(3) I enjoy my job immensely, and I suspect that was reflected in the photograph in the newspaper this morning. One of the things that I enjoy immensely about being the Attorney General for this State is the ability to be able to cooperate with the other senior law enforcement officers in this State to deliver a safer community to Western Australia. The individual who used to own that motorbike - it is now owned by the State, having been forfeited under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act - was the largest trafficker in a particular drug this State has ever known. The fact that he was a large-scale drug trafficker gave me even more pleasure to see him lose a trapping of a lifestyle with which no-one in this House would agree; that is, a drug-driven lifestyle of luxury. I hope members opposite will join with those on this side of the House in taking a very tough line on drug trafficking. We will show no sympathy whatsoever for drug traffickers in this State. In just over 12 months, we have frozen $23 million worth of assets, including money, motorbikes, property and houses. Mr Johnson: What about the question? Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY: I am answering it. As I said, I thank the member for the question. Assets worth $23 million have been frozen, and $1.2 million or $1.3 million has already found its way into the confiscation account. That compares with the meagre pickings acquired under the previous legislation, whereby the confiscation account had some $100 000 or $200 000 in it. That is the measure of success of the Act. The purpose of the photograph on the front page of this morning’s paper - it gave me enormous satisfaction - was to send the message to people that if they want to be drug traffickers and want to be involved in organised crime in this State, we will come after them. We will take away their houses, motorbikes and every other ill-gotten gain that they have derived from importing and trafficking in serious drugs in this State. Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr Birney: How did the motorbike arrive at Parliament House? Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY: I will tell members something else first. Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr Marlborough: I think you want to entrap your colleague on the back bench. You want to make sure he never gets to the front. The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
The SPEAKER: Members! Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr Johnson: What about an answer? Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY: I assure members opposite that they will get a genuine answer. Yesterday I was made aware that in the past week, a further $1 million has been frozen. That money was associated with drug trafficking and people who use houses for the hydroponic cultivation of large amounts of drugs for distribution and destruction within the Western Australian community. To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
To answer the specific questions raised by the member, the motorbike was brought to Parliament House on the back of a truck, where it was unloaded. Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr Johnson: A police truck? Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY: I am not sure what sort of truck it was; it did not have any obvious markings on it. It sat out the front of Parliament House after it brought the motorbike here. The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
The first question related to whether it was appropriate for the Director of Public Prosecutions and me to be seen to be cooperating to a significant degree. The answer is categorically: yes, it is. Unlike the previous Attorney General, I enjoy an excellent working relationship with the other senior law enforcement and judicial officers in this State. I do that because it is vitally important that we cooperate and work together with the very simple objective of defeating the scourge of organised crime and drugs in our community. I will happily help get that message out to the public. I am sure criminals will be seething after watching television last night and reading the newspaper this morning. We wanted to send them the message that they will be stripped of their assets if they engage in this sort of behaviour. We will not let up in that fight. I make that quite clear. I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
I am proud of the extent to which I cooperate with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Robert Cock is a ferociously independent Director of Public Prosecutions, as he should be. That does not mean that we cannot cooperate within our respective areas of responsibility for the common good. Quite frankly, to be at war and not cooperate and not work together is stupidity. I will continue to work with Robert Cock and all the other people. I appreciate that he has a responsibility to bring independent judgment to bear, which he does without fear or favour. The fact that we appeared jointly does not in any way, shape or form impugn or impinge upon the independence of his office and the requirement that he act independently. Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Members will recall that when the issue arose about whether there should be an appeal in the paedophile case involving Hough, we made it quite clear - Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr Omodei interjected. Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
Mr McGINTY: It was the Opposition’s question. Just because members do not like the answer does not give them cause for complaint. We made it clear that the Government had the view that an appeal should have been lodged in that case. However, I went on to say that that was a decision for the Director of Public Prosecutions. If the Government has a view, he should be aware of it and should take it into account in making up his mind. However, at the end of the day, it was his decision. In my 14 months of dealing with Robert Cock, I have found him to be a truly independent person. He will not be influenced by the sorts of issues that members opposite are raising today. He will not be influenced by anyone in the exercise of his discretion. He is doing a very good job towards that end. I will happily join with him in the fight against drug traffickers. What members saw yesterday was an example of how successful we are starting to become.
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.