❓ Mr. Katsambanis questions the Premier's awareness and involvement in a Supreme Court injunction related to the Bennett Brook Disability Justice Centre. The Premier denies involvement, stating the injunction was issued independently to protect patient privacy under the Declared Places (Mentally Impaired Accused) Act 2015.
AnsweredQoN 573Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
BENNETT BROOK DISABILITY
JUSTICE CENTRE — SUPREME COURT INJUNCTION
573. Mr P.A. KATSAMBANIS to the Premier:
Before I ask my question, I just
want to clarify that the member for Churchlands is away from the chamber
because he is at a funeral, and I will leave it at that.
I refer to the Premier's
comments yesterday in the house that he had no involvement in the injunction of
media outlets. Can the Premier confirm that he misled the house, given that the
media approached the Premier and his media director on Monday of this week and
informed them of the matter and therefore the Premier was clearly aware of and
involved in this injunction matter when the question was asked yesterday?
JUSTICE CENTRE — SUPREME COURT INJUNCTION
573. Mr P.A. KATSAMBANIS to the Premier:
Before I ask my question, I just
want to clarify that the member for Churchlands is away from the chamber
because he is at a funeral, and I will leave it at that.
I refer to the Premier's
comments yesterday in the house that he had no involvement in the injunction of
media outlets. Can the Premier confirm that he misled the house, given that the
media approached the Premier and his media director on Monday of this week and
informed them of the matter and therefore the Premier was clearly aware of and
involved in this injunction matter when the question was asked yesterday?
AnswerView source ↗
That is a strange twisting of the
English language. I understand that the injunction was issued by the director
general of the relevant agency, the Department of Communities, because he was
required to take action under the Declared Places (Mentally Impaired Accused)
Act 2015. That was done independently of me and my office. If we subsequently
received media queries about it, how does that mean we were involved in the
issuing of the injunction? What a strange perversion of the English language.
The press ask me questions all the time. They ask me about US politics. Does
that mean I was involved in the election of Donald Trump? I am asked about
things outside my knowledge all the time; it does not mean that I am involved
in the issue that created the question.
There is a requirement under the
Declared Places (Mentally Impaired Accused) Act 2015 that the identity and
circumstances of individuals kept in the Bennett Brook Disability Justice
Centre are to be kept private and are not allowed to be revealed. That act was
passed by the last Liberal–National government with, as I understand
it, Labor's support, on the basis that we protect these people's
identities. As opposed to what the member said yesterday, they have not been
convicted of anything; they are people —
Mr P.A. Katsambanis : I didn't
use that term, and you are verballing me. You are making it up.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Hillarys!
Mr M. McGOWAN : Yes, the
member did.
Mr P.A. Katsambanis : I did
not say they were convicted of anything.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Hillarys, you have a supplementary.
Mr
M. McGOWAN : The member described
the person as, quote, ''an offender''. Go back to law school, my
friend, because you clearly do not understand anything.
Mr P.A. Katsambanis : That is
not a convicted offender.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Hillarys!
Mr M. McGOWAN : You described
him as an offender. An offender is someone who has been convicted —
Mr P.A. Katsambanis : If they
weren't offenders, they wouldn't be there.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Hillarys!
Mr M. McGOWAN : I mean, my
God. I hope you are never the Attorney General.
This person has never been
convicted. .There is a requirement under the law passed in 2015 by the last
government that the identity of these people not be revealed. There had been a case
in which the person's identity or their face had, apparently, been
published, so therefore an injunction was sought by the department to try to
protect that person's identity and circumstances. The injunction itself
does not stop the media from reporting about other aspects of the centre's
operations; the media is just not allowed to report about that person's
identity and circumstances. That is in accordance with the law that the Liberal
Party passed when last in government.
English language. I understand that the injunction was issued by the director
general of the relevant agency, the Department of Communities, because he was
required to take action under the Declared Places (Mentally Impaired Accused)
Act 2015. That was done independently of me and my office. If we subsequently
received media queries about it, how does that mean we were involved in the
issuing of the injunction? What a strange perversion of the English language.
The press ask me questions all the time. They ask me about US politics. Does
that mean I was involved in the election of Donald Trump? I am asked about
things outside my knowledge all the time; it does not mean that I am involved
in the issue that created the question.
There is a requirement under the
Declared Places (Mentally Impaired Accused) Act 2015 that the identity and
circumstances of individuals kept in the Bennett Brook Disability Justice
Centre are to be kept private and are not allowed to be revealed. That act was
passed by the last Liberal–National government with, as I understand
it, Labor's support, on the basis that we protect these people's
identities. As opposed to what the member said yesterday, they have not been
convicted of anything; they are people —
Mr P.A. Katsambanis : I didn't
use that term, and you are verballing me. You are making it up.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Hillarys!
Mr M. McGOWAN : Yes, the
member did.
Mr P.A. Katsambanis : I did
not say they were convicted of anything.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Hillarys, you have a supplementary.
Mr
M. McGOWAN : The member described
the person as, quote, ''an offender''. Go back to law school, my
friend, because you clearly do not understand anything.
Mr P.A. Katsambanis : That is
not a convicted offender.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Hillarys!
Mr M. McGOWAN : You described
him as an offender. An offender is someone who has been convicted —
Mr P.A. Katsambanis : If they
weren't offenders, they wouldn't be there.
The SPEAKER : Member for
Hillarys!
Mr M. McGOWAN : I mean, my
God. I hope you are never the Attorney General.
This person has never been
convicted. .There is a requirement under the law passed in 2015 by the last
government that the identity of these people not be revealed. There had been a case
in which the person's identity or their face had, apparently, been
published, so therefore an injunction was sought by the department to try to
protect that person's identity and circumstances. The injunction itself
does not stop the media from reporting about other aspects of the centre's
operations; the media is just not allowed to report about that person's
identity and circumstances. That is in accordance with the law that the Liberal
Party passed when last in government.
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.