Legislative Assembly
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Legislative Assembly Thursday, 24 August 2006 THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling) took the chair at 9.00 am, and read prayers. AUSTRALIND RAIL SERVICE Petition MR G.M. CASTRILLI (Bunbury) [9.02 am]: I present the following petition, consisting of 463 pages with 8 633 signatures, from residents of Bunbury - To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned people, are very concerned at a proposal that will reduce the Australind passenger rail service from Bunbury to Perth. The Australind passenger rail service is a trusted means of travel for a large cross section of the southwest community, especially the elderly, disabled and unchaperoned children. It is our strong view that the proposal put forward does not consider the requirements of the current and future users of the Australind service for the following reasons: The elderly and disabled passengers may not be physically capable to board the coaches proposed for the first leg of the journey from Bunbury to Mandurah. This grouping and children will be forced to undertake an unassisted transfer with their luggage to the Metro train in Mandurah from the coach. The Metro train will not provide ticketed seating and a guarantee that a seat will be available. It will not provide luggage handling and storage services, food or toilet amenities. The major benefit of reduced travelling times is disputed by obvious delays associated with transfers. Coach services to Perth from Bunbury already exist. Now we ask that the Legislative Assembly direct the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure to ensure that the Australind passenger rail service from Bunbury to Perth is not reduced in anyway, rather upgraded and maintained as an important community service. [See petition 138.] AUSTRALIND RAIL SERVICE Petition MR A.J. SIMPSON (Serpentine-Jarrahdale) [9.03 am]: I present the following petition signed by 630 people - To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. We, the undersigned, say that the Australind Rail Line between Perth and Bunbury is an important transportation service for the people of the Peel and South West regions. This includes the people of Serpentine-Jarrahdale, many of who rely on this service to transport them to Perth for work on a daily basis. The result of the proposed changes would make it difficult for many residents of the area to attend their places of employment. People will have little choice but to drive in to Perth for work, increasing the level of traffic congestion on our already overloaded roads. Now we ask the Legislative Assembly to support the community of Serpentine-Jarrahdale by ensuring that the current Australind Train Service is maintained. [See petition 139.] AUSTRALIND RAIL SERVICE Petition MR G.M. CASTRILLI (Bunbury) [9.04 am]: I present the following petition, consisting of nine pages with 109 signatures, from residents who live along South Western Highway - To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia in Parliament assembled. 5200 [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 24 August 2006] We, the undersigned people, are very concerned at a proposal that will reduce the Australind passenger rail service from Bunbury to Perth, particular the effects it will have for the people of the South West Highway communities. Despite Ms MacTiernan’s assurances, we believe the travelling times, due to the embarking and disembarking in the eleven or so smaller towns on the Sth. Western Highway, will greatly increase from the present time table. ! We do not wish to sacrifice the comfort and convenience of the Australind train for the cramped and less than adequate conditions on a bus. ! Not being able to get out of our seats and stretch our legs, or have the choice of three or four easily accessible toilets, as on the Australind, is we believe much less attractive to our needs. ! The advantage of having a kiosk on the train whereby passengers can have a hot drink or a sandwich or hot pie, is also one of the main attractions that a bus cannot provide. ! Travelling on the train all the way to Perth is so much more stress free and relaxing. Especially for the aged, people in wheel chairs, mothers with restless children. Not to mention the extra handling and carrying of luggage and lack of allocated seats on the city trains, which will be made worse in the peak hour travelling. Now we ask that the Legislative Assembly direct the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure to ensure that the Australind passenger rail service from Bunbury to Perth is not reduced in anyway, rather upgraded and maintained as an important community service. [See petition 140.] PAPERS TABLED Papers were tabled and ordered to lie upon the table of the house. MINISTERIAL CODE OF CONDUCT Statement by Premier MR A.J. CARPENTER (Willagee - Premier) [9.07 am]: This government made a commitment in its 2001 policy statement “Integrity in Public Life” to establish a ministerial code of conduct. We tabled the ministerial code of conduct on 30 May 2001, making us the first Western Australian government to introduce such a code. The code is intended as a guide to assist ministers to avoid conflicts of interest. It has been revised to take into account and resolve apparent deficiencies in the first edition. We have - made it clear that the onus of disclosure of the interests of a minister and those of the minister’s family members lies with that minister; extended the relevant provisions in the code to include de facto partners; provided a disclosure form to assist ministers to make their disclosure statements; included a requirement that significant changes in the declared interests of ministers and their family members shall be disclosed within four weeks of the minister becoming aware of the changes; included a requirement that a minister disclose any conflicts of interest, or potential conflicts of interest, of family members to the Premier in cabinet; allowed for the cabinet secretary to raise independently any conflict of interest, or potential conflict of interest, of a minister or his or her family, noting that this does not derogate from the minister’s responsibility; and allowed for categories of indirect pecuniary interests, only when ministers have pecuniary interests that are sufficiently remote, or sufficiently indirect, from their influence and control that they do not pose a realistic risk of conflict. In tabling the revised ministerial code of conduct, the government is reiterating its ongoing commitment to open and accountable government. [See paper 1784.] PREMIER Personal Explanation - Response to Question on Notice 961 MR A.J. CARPENTER (Willagee - Premier) [9.08 am] - by leave: Pursuant to standing order 148, I make a personal explanation regarding my response to question on notice 961 from the member for Vasse about details [ASSEMBLY - Thursday, 24 August 2006] 5201 of staffing at ministerial offices. Some of the information provided in tabled paper 1579 was not complete or correct. I table the corrected document. [See paper 1785.] SENTENCING LEGISLATION REFORM Statement by Attorney General MR J.A. McGINTY (Fremantle - Attorney General) [9.10 am]: I inform the house about the progress the state Labor government has made to ensure that people convicted of murder and wilful murder serve lengthy jail terms to reflect the heinous nature of their crimes. Western Australia has some of the toughest penalties in the nation when it comes to serious crimes committed against people. The Labor government’s sentencing legislation reforms ensure that those who commit the most serious offences receive longer sentences and serve longer time in prison. A Department of the Attorney General report on minimum sentences for these offences over the past 10 years shows that the minimum time to be served for wilful murder has increased by 32 per cent, while the minimum time to be served for murder has increased by 20 per cent. This means that the average minimum time to be served by prisoners given an indeterminate sentence for wilful murder has increased from 16 years in 1996 to 21 years in 2006. For murder the minimum time to be served increased from 10 years in 1996 to 13 years in 2006. Implicitly, the average time that is actually served across the total group will be significantly higher because large numbers of those sentenced for murder and wilful murder in the past 10 years have not been released and many will not be released in the near future. The changes to sentencing legislation made by this government in 2003 have closed the gap between the maximum sentences given and the time to be spent in prison. Before the removal of the one-third remission on sentences, the average time to be served by offenders entering prison was about 40 per cent of the average maximum sentence. By 2006 this proportion had increased to 58 per cent. An indication of the increased amount of time spent in prison for murder and wilful murder is provided by the data on prisoners released. This smaller group of prisoners consists of those who have been assessed as presenting a low risk to the public. Between 1996 and 2006, 199 people were given indeterminate sentences while only 83 were released. There is cumulative growth in the number of serious offenders who are not being released. Of those who have been released in the past 10 years, the average minimum time spent in prison increased by 66 per cent for wilful murder; that is, from 10 years to 16 years, while the average minimum time spent in prison for murder increased by 45 per cent; that is, from 8.5 years in 1997 to 12.2 years in 2006.