❓ Opposition asks Premier Carpenter if he asked Shelley Archer to resign from the ALP following evidence to the CCC and a spent conviction for social security fraud. Premier avoids a direct answer, questioning the Opposition's motives and legal understanding.
AnsweredQoN 68Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
HON SHELLEY ARCHER - RESIGNATION FROM AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY
(1) Why did the Premier ask Shelley Archer to resign from the Australian Labor Party? (2) Given that the Premier asked her to resign, why has she defied him? Mr A.J. CARPENTER
(1) Why did the Premier ask Shelley Archer to resign from the Australian Labor Party? (2) Given that the Premier asked her to resign, why has she defied him? Mr A.J. CARPENTER
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. As I recall, there was a similar question asked of me yesterday and the day before. I have provided an explanation that the Leader of the Opposition appears not to want to get through his head. The answer went something like this: when Hon Shelley Archer went to the Corruption and Crime Commission and gave her evidence, I was most disturbed by that evidence and I made a decision after some deliberation that it was necessary for me to take an action against her. I stripped her of two positions as a member of a parliamentary committee - Mr P.D. Omodei : How did you do that? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
(2) Given that the Premier asked her to resign, why has she defied him? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(2) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. As I recall, there was a similar question asked of me yesterday and the day before. I have provided an explanation that the Leader of the Opposition appears not to want to get through his head. The answer went something like this: when Hon Shelley Archer went to the Corruption and Crime Commission and gave her evidence, I was most disturbed by that evidence and I made a decision after some deliberation that it was necessary for me to take an action against her. I stripped her of two positions as a member of a parliamentary committee - Mr P.D. Omodei : How did you do that? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(2) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. As I recall, there was a similar question asked of me yesterday and the day before. I have provided an explanation that the Leader of the Opposition appears not to want to get through his head. The answer went something like this: when Hon Shelley Archer went to the Corruption and Crime Commission and gave her evidence, I was most disturbed by that evidence and I made a decision after some deliberation that it was necessary for me to take an action against her. I stripped her of two positions as a member of a parliamentary committee - Mr P.D. Omodei : How did you do that? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
(1)-(2) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. As I recall, there was a similar question asked of me yesterday and the day before. I have provided an explanation that the Leader of the Opposition appears not to want to get through his head. The answer went something like this: when Hon Shelley Archer went to the Corruption and Crime Commission and gave her evidence, I was most disturbed by that evidence and I made a decision after some deliberation that it was necessary for me to take an action against her. I stripped her of two positions as a member of a parliamentary committee - Mr P.D. Omodei : How did you do that? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei : How did you do that? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . .
(a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . .
The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
(i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged -
(ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged -
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
(2) Given that the Premier asked her to resign, why has she defied him? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(2) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. As I recall, there was a similar question asked of me yesterday and the day before. I have provided an explanation that the Leader of the Opposition appears not to want to get through his head. The answer went something like this: when Hon Shelley Archer went to the Corruption and Crime Commission and gave her evidence, I was most disturbed by that evidence and I made a decision after some deliberation that it was necessary for me to take an action against her. I stripped her of two positions as a member of a parliamentary committee - Mr P.D. Omodei : How did you do that? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(2) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. As I recall, there was a similar question asked of me yesterday and the day before. I have provided an explanation that the Leader of the Opposition appears not to want to get through his head. The answer went something like this: when Hon Shelley Archer went to the Corruption and Crime Commission and gave her evidence, I was most disturbed by that evidence and I made a decision after some deliberation that it was necessary for me to take an action against her. I stripped her of two positions as a member of a parliamentary committee - Mr P.D. Omodei : How did you do that? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
(1)-(2) I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. As I recall, there was a similar question asked of me yesterday and the day before. I have provided an explanation that the Leader of the Opposition appears not to want to get through his head. The answer went something like this: when Hon Shelley Archer went to the Corruption and Crime Commission and gave her evidence, I was most disturbed by that evidence and I made a decision after some deliberation that it was necessary for me to take an action against her. I stripped her of two positions as a member of a parliamentary committee - Mr P.D. Omodei : How did you do that? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei : How did you do that? The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I should say I strongly suggested that it would be appropriate if she were no longer on those committees. I also stripped her of the position of chairperson of the task force that I had established into the impact of the changes to the community development employment program in Western Australia. That was on about 1 or 2 March. Roughly 10 days later another piece of information - a new piece of information to me - about Hon Shelley Archer became public knowledge via The West Australian . That was a revelation that that member of Parliament had a spent conviction for social security fraud, which involved offences against the commonwealth. I understand that the offences took place in the late 1980s, there was a court case in about 1992 and penalties were imposed. In 2002, 10 years later, that conviction was spent. I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
I told the Parliament some time ago now - perhaps Tuesday - that before I made any public commentary about that, I had a nagging suspicion from my days as a journalist that there was some limitation on commenting about people who had a spent conviction. I was somewhat surprised - not totally surprised because it was The West Australian newspaper that published it - that the story had appeared as it did, as I had an intuitive feeling that it may have been a breach of the law. As it turns out, there is absolutely no doubt that the publication of that information by that newspaper was a breach of the law. Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr J.A. McGinty : No doubt whatsoever, Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It was a breach of the law. I had to bear in mind, and I have to bear in mind, that I am the Premier of the state; I am not a journalist anymore. I am not the editor of The West Australian , who quite frequently flouts all sorts of conventions and occasionally even the law, and is convicted from time to time for doing just that. I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I am the Premier of the state. I have to abide by the law. I therefore sought advice as to the law on these matters. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought that advice? Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Please listen. The Liberal Party has already been humiliated today by a report which outlines the Leader of the Opposition’s response yesterday to an answer by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in attempting to respond to a question, and which indicates that the opposition failed to listen to the minister. The Leader of the Opposition has asked a question for the third day in a row. Basically I am giving him the response that is required and he should listen to it. Has the Leader of the Opposition sought legal advice about the pursuit of this issue or about making commentary on this issue, and about the ability of a person to take action against another person, or take account of a spent conviction against another person? Has the Leader of the Opposition done that? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : What the Leader of the Opposition has said to me over and over again - Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei : What I have asked is: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Today the Leader of the Opposition made an assertion. Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei : That is what I asked you: did you ask her to resign? Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No, today the Leader of the Opposition went further than that; he made an assertion. He did not ask a question; he made an assertion. I am telling the Leader of the Opposition that commonwealth law makes it an offence and says that it is unlawful for a person to take account of a spent - Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett : No-one wears that argument. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : No-one wears it? Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett : No, they don’t. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I have said before that it is absolutely astounding to me that the alternative Premier of the state, who has held high office - let alone the now backbencher-cum-frontbencher and roving commentator on all things under the sun, including water policy, and who at one stage was deputy leader of the Liberal Party while in government - now says that it is pathetic that the Premier of the day should take the law into account. It is pathetic that he says the Premier of the day should break the law! Can members imagine what would happen and the degree of sympathy that would be generated if I were to break the law along the lines that I am being told to break the law? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Because it does not seem to sink in to members opposite and because my relatively brief but accurate response to this question does not seem to have registered previously, I will now read into Hansard the relevant section of the commonwealth law, and my friends opposite can listen. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Members! Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett : What a farce! Fancy hiding members of Parliament behind that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to take more than an hour to do it. Opposition members have asked the question; they will get the answer. Section 85ZW of the Crimes Act of 1914 states - Effect of right of non-disclosure Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . . Mr C.J. Barnett : Is Shelley Archer claiming that? The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Subject to Division 6, but despite any other Commonwealth law, or any State law or Territory law, where, under section 85ZV, it is lawful for a person not to disclose, in particular circumstances, or for a particular purpose, the fact that he or she was charged with, or convicted of an offence: (a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . .
(a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the offence . . .
The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : In other words, a person with a spent conviction under this commonwealth law can swear on oath that he or she has had no conviction. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Order! I call to order the members for Murray, Roe, Dawesville and Darling Range. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Perhaps we should ask some of the more learned members to provide a tutorial for the ignoramuses in the lower house. They are obviously incapable of upholding the laws of the land and of even recognising the laws of the land. To continue - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Order! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Anyone else who knows - this goes to the commentary I made earlier - or could reasonably be expected to know, that section 85ZV applies to the person in relation to the offence shall not: (i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged - Mr P.D. Omodei : What is the legal advice - Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
(i) without the person’s consent, disclose the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence to any other person, or to a Commonwealth authority or State authority, where it is lawful for the first-mentioned person not to disclose it to that other person or that authority; or (ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged -
(ii) in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged -
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : Is the Leader of the Opposition changing his question now? Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei : No, I’m not. I’m asking whether you asked her to resign or not. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : To continue - in those circumstances, or for that purpose, take account of the fact that the person was charged with, or convicted of, the offence. In other words, it would be unlawful for me or anyone else to behave in the way that the opposition is urging me to behave. Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett : You are right; we are wrong: Shelley Archer is a role model for people in this state! It never happened - what a joke! Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : The people of Western Australia can make their own judgement upon who does or does not make an appropriate role model. Judging by the people who have sat in this Parliament for the same amount of time, or perhaps even longer than, I have, it is pretty obvious which inappropriate role models sit in this chamber. From my observation, the person above all others who has been the most inappropriate role model as a member of Parliament is none other than the member for Cottesloe, who has been a disgraceful contributor to this Parliament for a very long time. Point of Order Mr T.K. WALDRON : My point of order goes to the relevance of the question. I hardly ever call a point of order in this Parliament. Question time has been in progress for almost 14 minutes, and the Premier has not attempted to answer the actual question. His answer is completely irrelevant and I draw that to your attention, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : Order! The member for Wagin inadvertently said that he thought the question was irrelevant. The answer the Premier is providing to this house is about the reasons a question was either asked or not. It is completely relevant to the question that was asked of the Premier. Questions Without Notice Resumed Mr A.J. CARPENTER : I am happy to keep going. Members opposite wanted to know. I have now laid out before members opposite what the law of the land of Australia says on these matters. We hear hysterical screaming about the spent conviction and assertions that I should take account of that fact and effectively eject the member from the Parliament and the Labor Party. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, what would happen if the Premier of the state tried to have someone ejected on the basis members opposite are proposing when that would be clearly in contravention of the law of the land? I would not last in my job if I did that. Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett interjected. Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
The SPEAKER : I call to order the member for Cottesloe and the Leader of the Opposition. Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER : It is astounding that, for three days in a row, that is exactly what the alternative government has demanded of me in the Parliament; namely, that I should break the law and that my failure to break the law means that I have somehow failed. I hesitate to say this but I must say it: I do not think the people of Western Australia would actually embrace yet another of their political leaders breaking the law.
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.