❓ Mr. Johnson questions the Attorney General about the placement of convicted rapist Paul Stephen Keating in a medium-security prison and the AG's lack of intervention. The AG provides a detailed account of Keating's prison history and security assessments.
AnsweredQoN 8Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the Attorney General to my question yesterday, when I asked him why he did not take action to ensure that convicted rapist Paul Stephen Keating was held in a maximum-security prison, and his evasive response, using the familiar Labor catchcry, “I do not remember.” Now that the Attorney General has had 24 hours to refresh his memory and consult his records, I ask - (1) Is it true that the Attorney General was advised that Keating was in the medium-security Bunbury Regional Prison when the Parole Board asked for the Attorney General’s approval for Keating to undertake a pre-release parole program in late 2004? (2) If so, why did the Attorney General not immediately have Keating transferred back to maximum security, given that he has acknowledged publicly that he is “one of the worst criminals in the state”? Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) There are just over 3 500 prisoners in Western Australian jails, and it is unreasonable, notwithstanding my very good memory, to expect me to know exactly which prisoner was at which prison at any time in the past. Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
(1) Is it true that the Attorney General was advised that Keating was in the medium-security Bunbury Regional Prison when the Parole Board asked for the Attorney General’s approval for Keating to undertake a pre-release parole program in late 2004? (2) If so, why did the Attorney General not immediately have Keating transferred back to maximum security, given that he has acknowledged publicly that he is “one of the worst criminals in the state”? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) There are just over 3 500 prisoners in Western Australian jails, and it is unreasonable, notwithstanding my very good memory, to expect me to know exactly which prisoner was at which prison at any time in the past. Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
(2) If so, why did the Attorney General not immediately have Keating transferred back to maximum security, given that he has acknowledged publicly that he is “one of the worst criminals in the state”? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) There are just over 3 500 prisoners in Western Australian jails, and it is unreasonable, notwithstanding my very good memory, to expect me to know exactly which prisoner was at which prison at any time in the past. Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) There are just over 3 500 prisoners in Western Australian jails, and it is unreasonable, notwithstanding my very good memory, to expect me to know exactly which prisoner was at which prison at any time in the past. Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
(1)-(2) There are just over 3 500 prisoners in Western Australian jails, and it is unreasonable, notwithstanding my very good memory, to expect me to know exactly which prisoner was at which prison at any time in the past. Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
(1) Is it true that the Attorney General was advised that Keating was in the medium-security Bunbury Regional Prison when the Parole Board asked for the Attorney General’s approval for Keating to undertake a pre-release parole program in late 2004? (2) If so, why did the Attorney General not immediately have Keating transferred back to maximum security, given that he has acknowledged publicly that he is “one of the worst criminals in the state”? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) There are just over 3 500 prisoners in Western Australian jails, and it is unreasonable, notwithstanding my very good memory, to expect me to know exactly which prisoner was at which prison at any time in the past. Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
(2) If so, why did the Attorney General not immediately have Keating transferred back to maximum security, given that he has acknowledged publicly that he is “one of the worst criminals in the state”? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) There are just over 3 500 prisoners in Western Australian jails, and it is unreasonable, notwithstanding my very good memory, to expect me to know exactly which prisoner was at which prison at any time in the past. Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1)-(2) There are just over 3 500 prisoners in Western Australian jails, and it is unreasonable, notwithstanding my very good memory, to expect me to know exactly which prisoner was at which prison at any time in the past. Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
(1)-(2) There are just over 3 500 prisoners in Western Australian jails, and it is unreasonable, notwithstanding my very good memory, to expect me to know exactly which prisoner was at which prison at any time in the past. Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
Mr M.J. Birney interjected. The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
The SPEAKER : Order, Leader of the Opposition! Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
Mr J.A. McGINTY : For that reason I gave the answer that every member of this house would expect me to give; that is, an honest answer to the effect that, if the member requires that sort of detail, he should do exactly as was just done for the Minister for Justice, in which case the detail of which prison a particular prisoner was located at can be ascertained. I have ascertained that, when the present government assumed office, Mr Keating was being managed by the Serious Offenders Management Committee. He was being held at Casuarina Prison. In October 2001, Keating was transferred to Albany Regional Prison. At that time he was rated maximum security. He had completed the intensive sex offender treatment program, and was participating in individual psychological counselling. Albany Regional Prison had established a management plan that took staff safety issues into consideration. While at Albany Regional Prison he was also able to continue with the psychological counselling and his university studies. Mr Keating was then reduced to a medium-security rating on 20 February 2002 because the classification assessment instrument indicated his suitability for medium security. This was done internal to the Department of Justice, with no reference to me, as the member would have heard from the answer that was just given by the Minister for Justice. The decision to move Mr Keating to Bunbury was based on the fact that, in the eyes of the Department of Justice, he needed to continue his preparation for release and that he would have better access to his community support people at Bunbury as they resided in the metropolitan area. The Department of Justice also found that his conduct and behaviour in Albany prison had been satisfactory and had not caused concern. Bunbury Regional Prison was, in the view of the department, the correct prison for his security rating. The prison was agreeable to his placement there, and it was considered appropriate for him to work towards participation in a prerelease program in preparation for possible eventual release or parole. Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
Since 2003 the Parole Board of WA has twice recommended Keating for inclusion in a prerelease program - in February 2003 and June 2004 - and on each occasion I rejected the recommendations of the Parole Board. In March 2003 I noted - I quote from my note on the Parole Board file - that “this report on Mr Keating’s prison behaviour renders him too great a risk to be considered for a prerelease program at this time.”
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.