Docstoc

Legislative Assembly_1_

Document Sample
Legislative Assembly_1_ Powered By Docstoc
					                                          Legislative Assembly
                                            Tuesday, 16 October 2007


THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling) took the chair at 2.00 pm, and read prayers.
                                          ILLNESS - BEST WISHES
                                              Statement by Speaker
THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling): Members, before I take my seat, I would like to thank all those who
wished me all the best during my recent illness. It is very encouraging when one gets those sorts of messages,
and I thank members very much.
                                           HON KIM BEAZLEY SR
                                              Statement by Premier
MR A.J. CARPENTER (Willagee - Premier) [2.01 pm]: It saddens me to mark here today the passing of a
Western Australian political legend, Mr Kim Beazley senior, who passed away on Friday night at the age of 90.
There is no doubt that he made a massive contribution to Australian public life, and was universally respected
and admired across the nation. I think it is fitting to spend a little time to reflect upon the vast achievements of
the man.
On 5 July 1945, just weeks before victory in the Pacific, Australian Prime Minister John Curtin died in office.
Kim Beazley senior, then a teacher and academic at the University of Western Australia, succeeded Curtin in the
seat of Fremantle. In doing so, he became the youngest person to enter the House of Representatives. He would
serve there with great wisdom and influence for three decades.
Kim was a person of principle and a person who had a very clear view of what he thought was good for the
nation. What is more, he pursued these views without bitterness. Kim is rightly respected and admired across
this country for his service to education. Serving as Gough Whitlam’s education minister, Kim used
commonwealth funds to greatly increase the quality and accessibility of education in this country. He
transformed the nation’s education system for the better. He would do this again in 1983, but at a state level,
when he came out of retirement to head an inquiry into Western Australia’s education system, and the resulting
report continues to shape our state’s system today.
I believe it is true to say that for many years he was the only bright light from the Labor Party in WA in the
federal arena, and he fought hard for our interests. However, Kim demands all of our respect for a great many
other things, not least of all for his commitment to Indigenous reconciliation, a cause he began championing as
early as 1952. It is a cause that has been noted by my predecessor, Dr Geoff Gallop, who said that in many ways
Kim was the WA Labor politician who put Aboriginal rights on the agenda.
Kim will also be for many people in this country a man who restored to politics an unfortunately elusive moral
clarity and courage. It is now a cliché to remark that Kim would have perhaps been more successful in politics
had he surrendered his principles more often. Kim did not surrender them, and we are all now left with a shining
and instructive testament to moral strength in politics. It is also no small thing to comment on the fact that Kim
brought an impressive eloquence and intelligence to public discourse. He will be missed.
On behalf of the state government and all Western Australians, I pass on my deepest sympathy to Betty, Kim
junior, Merrilyn, and all his family and friends.
                                         ROAD SAFETY STRATEGY
                                   Statement by Minister for Community Safety
MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta - Minister for Community Safety) [2.05 pm]: Road safety and tackling the
dangers of travel throughout Western Australia remain an immense challenge. Today I inform the house of the
progress of the next Road Safety Strategy - part of the widest community and parliamentary consultation on road
safety ever to be undertaken in Australia.
The parliamentary road safety reference group met yesterday and was briefed on the discussion paper “Towards
Zero - Getting There Together”, prepared by the Office of Road Safety. The paper has today been released for
community consultation, along with an accompanying feedback survey. The discussion paper has been
developed from the evidence-based modelling approach by Monash University Accident Research Centre, and
provides a scientific basis for the recommendations. It advocates a safe systems approach to road safety and the
final outcomes of the consultation will enable government to make changes and put our efforts where they will
truly make a difference.
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                    6115

The Carpenter government remains focused on doing all that it can to improve road safety in Western Australia,
and I appreciate the bipartisan parliamentary support that has been expressed towards the development of the
next strategy. I urge all members of Parliament to become involved and to talk about the issues raised in the
discussions paper with their communities.
Road safety is a responsibility of us all, and I am most willing to provide a briefing for those members who have
not been part of the process so they can talk to their communities about the development of our next road safety
strategy.
The results of the consultation will be reported back to the Road Safety Council, which will again seek the view
of the parliamentary road safety reference group in early 2008, prior to the finalisation of the strategy.
Despite our best efforts thus far we continue to be faced with a rising road toll and, for some people, our safety
messages are just not getting through. One fact remains unchanged: road trauma in all its forms is a tragic waste
and all that can be done must be done to stop it.
I table the “Towards Zero - Getting There Together” discussion paper, along with the related survey form.
[See paper 3288.]
                     DEPUTY PREMIER - VISIT TO JAPAN, KOREA AND CHINA
                                             Statement by Treasurer
MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont - Treasurer) [2.07 pm]: I have recently visited Japan, Korea and China to build
relationships with governments and companies in those countries that are important to Western Australia. I met
major customers in all three countries and discussed new opportunities for investment in Western Australia. I
made presentations on the state’s finances to a number of major banking institutions in Japan. While in Japan I
took the opportunity to visit Governor Ido in Hyogo Prefecture to further strengthen our 26-year sister-state
relationship.
In China, on this twentieth anniversary of our sister-state relationship with Zhejiang province, I had meetings
with the provincial Communist Party Secretary, Mr Zhao Hongzhu and with the Vice Governor, Dr Zhong Shan.
In Korea I visited Gyongsangbuk-do province and signed a letter of intent to investigate establishing a
meaningful government- to-government relationship.
I was pleased with the high regard our trading partners have for Western Australia as a reliable global supplier.
There is a consensus that strong demand for our commodities will continue for the foreseeable future. The
Chinese National Development and Reform Commission told me it expects China’s economic growth to
continue, though at a slightly more moderate pace. The universal view was that the iron ore market will remain
a seller’s market until at least 2015.
Steel companies all raised the problems they are experiencing on Australia’s east coast with port and rail
infrastructure inefficiencies. They urged the state government to be careful to avoid a similar situation arising
here.
I also held meetings in Japan, Korea and China with stakeholders involved in mid-west iron ore projects.
Contrary to some ill-informed, pre-trip media speculation, at no time was any question raised about any
sovereign risk in Western Australia, and the government’s approach to the Murchison State Agreement Act,
although rarely discussed, was received positively.
Those companies all understood the challenges faced by the government in seeking to facilitate a sustainable and
practical solution to iron ore export infrastructure for the mid-west. They were pleased with the government’s
leadership in resolving the impasse created when the companies could not act cooperatively.
Companies involved in the natural gas business remarked on Western Australia’s record as a reliable supplier of
LNG. I was able to advise them that both the Gorgon and Pluto projects had received state environmental
approval and, as it happened, they also received commonwealth approval during my visit.
A significant shortfall in LNG supply to Korea is possible by 2011, and China is keen to increase its gas imports
as part of its commitment to reduce its environmental impact. It is significant that PetroChina has recently
contracted for supplies of LNG from Woodside even before the location of Woodside’s Browse gas LNG plant
has been determined.
It is worth noting that Western Australia’s need to secure its own future energy supply through a domestic gas
policy was acknowledged by those countries which themselves are struggling to ensure energy security for their
future. A number of countries expressed an interest in entering the construction market in this state, although
there were concerns about the shortages of skills in Australia.
In conclusion, my visit reaffirmed for me the high standing of our state among our major international trading
and investment partners.
6116                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

                                       FIFA WOMEN’S WORLD CUP
                                 Statement by Minister for Sport and Recreation
MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta - Minister for Sport and Recreation) [2.10 pm]: Members would be aware of
the terrific achievements of the Australian women’s football - soccer - team in reaching the quarterfinals of the
recently completed FIFA Women’s World Cup in China. The team had a solid victory over Ghana, draws with
Norway and Canada and then, of course, the narrow 3-2 loss to Brazil in the quarterfinal. It was an amazing
effort from the team, which has caused it to rise to the third highest Asian team and the twelfth highest team in
the world, its highest ranking since the inception of the world rankings in 2003.
Crucial to the success of the team were the contributions of two Western Australian-based athletes, Collette
McCallum and Lisa De Vanna. Collette, a former Joondalup Junior and Western Australian Institute of Sport
scholarship holder, was outstanding. Her goal from a free kick in the 2-2 draw with Canada was a tremendous
strike and will long be remembered. Collette’s efforts were recognised in her recent nomination as one of the
three Matildas vying for the 2007 Asian Football Confederation Women’s Player of the Year award. The winner
will be announced in early November. Lisa, who has represented Spearwood United, Cockburn United,
Murdoch and Stirling Reds clubs in Western Australia, scored an incredible four goals in the Matildas’ run to the
quarterfinals. Her efforts were rewarded with her being named in the FIFA Team of the Tournament and she has
subsequently been short-listed for the 2007 FIFA Women’s World Player of the Year award. She is the only
Matilda to have been nominated for this prestigious international award. The winner will be announced on
7 December in Zurich.
On behalf of all members, I congratulate the entire Matildas team for their stunning effort, but in particular, our
congratulations are extended to the two Western Australian champions, Collette McCallum and Lisa De Vanna.
                                      QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
       CORRUPTION AND CRIME COMMISSION - REPORT ON SMITHS BEACH DEVELOPMENT
1.       Mr P.D. OMODEI to the Premier:
I refer the Premier to comments in the Corruption and Crime Commission’s report on the Smiths Beach
development that -
         During the compilation of this report there has been considerable debate about the power of the
         Commission to make comments on allegations of misconduct by non-public officers. Therefore, in
         order to avoid further delaying the tabling of this report, comment on non-public officers, particularly
         Messrs Burke and Grill, has been limited to reporting the facts concerning their actions as revealed by
         the Commission’s investigations.
(1)      Does the Premier concede that deficiencies in the powers of the Corruption and Crime Commission
         have effectively gagged it from making comment on non-public officers such as Brian Burke and Julian
         Grill?
(2)      Will the Premier agree to provide bipartisan support for amendments to the Corruption and Crime
         Commission Act to extend the category of persons capable of being investigated for misconduct to non-
         public officers, as already contained in Queensland’s Crime and Misconduct Act and the New South
         Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption Act?
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied:
(1)-(2) In relation to the second point, we will consider any proposition to improve the efficacy and the work of
        the Corruption and Crime Commission, if the member has a detailed proposition. If the member has a
        proposition and wishes to discuss it with the Attorney General, I am sure he would be more than happy
        to discuss any proposition or proposal. Until the member has one, we will leave it at that.
         In relation to the first question, yes, there are those limitations, which the CCC has recognised.
         However, it is blatantly obvious to everybody that the activities of Brian Burke and Julian Grill have
         been exposed, and people can make their own judgements. I have made mine. I have taken action - the
         sort of action that the Leader of the Opposition has been unable to replicate in the matters over which he
         has some sort of control. The CCC, for all the pain that it may have caused some individuals, has done
         us a major service. It has revealed the activities of Brian Burke and Julian Grill and to the best -
Mr C.J. Barnett: Nobody is smiling on that side of the house.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order!
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: There are more reports to come and to the best of my abilities I have enacted changes
that will see those activities cease.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                   6117

      CORRUPTION AND CRIME COMMISSION - REPORT ON SMITHS BEACH DEVELOPMENT
2.      Mr P.D. OMODEI to the Premier:
I have a supplementary question. Why does the Premier have to wait for a proposition from the opposition to
change the legislation?
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied:
I thought that was the content of the member’s question. He was asking whether the government was prepared
to consider a proposition from the opposition.
                   FEDERAL TREASURER, MR PETER COSTELLO - VISIT TO PERTH
3.      Mr P.B. WATSON to the Premier:
I refer to the visit to Perth by Peter Costello last week. What was Mr Costello’s latest contribution to the
Western Australian economy?
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied:
I thank the member for Albany for the question. The short answer is nothing.
Mr T. Buswell: What about his tax cuts?
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Did the member for Vasse describe what has happened as tax cuts by Peter Costello,
even though the tax take continues to increase? Is that right? The member is so shallow. The fundamental
question that the people of Western Australia might ask about the member for Vasse is whether he can be
trusted. Is it appropriate for a member of Parliament to have clandestine meetings in the car park of Parliament
House with the subject of a Corruption and Crime Commission inquiry? Would we trust a man who behaves
that way with any public office?
I think Peter Costello took more away in donations to the Liberal Party than he has put into Western Australia in
his recent term as Treasurer. He treats Western Australia as a giant automatic teller machine. Western Australia
is Peter Costello’s ATM - he punches in the numbers and all the money flies out, and he spreads it around to east
coast marginal seats.
Mr T. Buswell interjected.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Mr Speaker, in your absence the behaviour and demeanour of the member for Vasse
has not improved significantly, despite the efforts of your replacement. He still behaves like an unruly
schoolboy.
Mr P.D. Omodei: Did you attend the Ben Wyatt function on the invitation of Brian Burke and Julian Grill?
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The Leader of the Opposition should stand up and ask that question. He need not
worry about me; I will let the people of Western Australia make that sort of judgement.
Western Australia is the giant ATM for the federal Treasurer. Did he promise us any additional contribution for
infrastructure development in this state? No, he did not. Did he promise us anything to do with any contribution
from royalty streams from projects like Pluto and Gorgon? No, nothing like that.
Mr T. Buswell interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order!
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: He cannot help himself; he is hardwired that way!
Kevin Rudd, on the other hand, has made very significant contributions and commitments to underpin the
economic strength of Western Australia and therefore Australia, because I think he understands that the projects
we are dealing with in Western Australia are national projects that deserve national support. I am absolutely
convinced that John Howard and Peter Costello have no concept of that issue. I agree entirely with the member
for Cottesloe.
Mr C.J. Barnett: It would be the first time.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is not the first time. The member for Cottesloe said of the federal Treasurer -
        “He doesn’t seem to grasp the economic opportunity of a more sophisticated resource-based economy
        for WA . . .
The member also said of Mr Costello -
        . . . I’m not sure that he fully grasps the big picture on natural gas . . .
I think we all know that he does not; he has no idea. After 11 years at the helm of the national economy as the
Treasurer of this country, he does not have an understanding of the significance of the developments in the
6118                              [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

western half of the nation of Australia. He has no idea, and nor does John Howard. The Liberal Party in
Western Australia should follow the lead of the member for Cottesloe and point that out. I am waiting to hear
the view of the Leader of the Opposition on the failure of Mr Costello -
Mr T. Buswell: You should ask a question.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I am not allowed to ask questions.
I am waiting to hear the view of the Leader of the Opposition on the failure of Mr Costello and Mr Howard on
the Western Australian economy. We are at a critical moment in the development of this state and nation, and
we need a national government that recognises the significance of Western Australia’s contribution, which is the
underpinning of our national economic growth. We have not had one. Kevin Rudd understands the issue and,
given the chance, which I hope he gets, he will deliver us significant benefits.
The SPEAKER: Members, I am advised that the only speaker in this place that is working properly is mine,
which creates a bit of a problem during question time. I ask members to interject less than is normal to allow
everybody to hear what is being said.
                 POLICE - FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO COMBAT ORGANISED CRIME
4.      Mr R.F. JOHNSON to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services:
I refer to police commissioner Karl O’Callaghan’s submission to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the
Australian Crime Commission that the financial resources applied to combat organised crime by Western
Australia Police in 2006 was approximately $4.2 million.
(1)     Is the figure of $4.2 million as identified in the police commissioner’s submission accurate?
(2)     Given that the minister has tried to spin a figure 10 times that amount, has he sat down with the police
        commissioner to reconcile his figures?
(3)     Should we believe the minister or the police commissioner on the level of funding applied by Western
        Australia Police to tackle organised crime?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
I thank the member for his question.
(1)-(3) We are quite aware of the opposition using figures in a false way and this report also has not got it
        straight. Yes, I have sat down with the commissioner.
Mr R.F. Johnson: Have you seen that report?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Yes. I have sat down with the commissioner and I agree with him.
Mr R.F. Johnson: Oh, you do?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Yes, and the figure is about $30 million.
Mr R.F. Johnson: No, $4.2 million.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: This is where the opposition gets it so wrong. It does not look at the criteria. If it looked
at the organised crime group only, yes, it is $4.2 million. However, it looks at commercial agents, which is set
up to deal with an aspect of organised crime, and a range of other areas, such as the motor squad -
Mr R.F. Johnson: The motor squad?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Yes, that is what it was set up for.
Mr R.F. Johnson: What about the lollypop men who see the children across the street?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: That demonstrates the absolute nonsense of the member opposite. The reason that the
motor squad deals with it is that there has been a marked reduction in the theft of cars. We have found that the
reduced number is not being recovered because the vehicles have been rebadged by organised crime groups
across Australia and internationally.
The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Therefore, it is a key component of the attack on organised crime. Similarly, when there
is a bust on a bikie gang, the organised crime group does not attend on its own - the tactical response group and
other groups that investigate organised crime also attend.
The fact is that the commissioner and I sat down and he pointed out to me that the $4.2 million was a total
misrepresentation of the amount of resources that are going into the fight against organised crime. Again, we
find that members opposite take something out of context and try to beat it into something that it is not.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                       6119

                                 COMMONWEALTH PAYMENTS TO STATES
5.       Dr J.M. EDWARDS to the Treasurer:
Welcome back, Mr Speaker. Can the Treasurer confirm recent media reports that total payments to the states
from the commonwealth have fallen to their lowest level in a decade?
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied:
I have previously given information to the house about the decline in share of gross domestic product allocated
to states’ revenues. This is a very important issue. I am talking about the impact on all states. However, the
position for Western Australia is even worse because of the way in which it is punished for its economic success
and the way in which the Commonwealth Grants Commission does not take into account the cost of building
infrastructure when this state’s share of commonwealth grants is determined. The commonwealth is just missing
in action when it comes to the Western Australian economy and its infrastructure requirements.
Let me give to the house the figures that I have given previously. The commonwealth is allocating $239 per
capita for infrastructure in 2007-08, while the Western Australian government is allocating $2 218 per capita in
the same financial year. Why do we do this? We do this to avoid export bottlenecks. We do not want the same
sorts of bottlenecks that have occurred on the eastern seaboard. We want to ensure that our prosperity in this
state is maximised. We have to do that because the commonwealth government is just missing in action. Not
only has it turned its back on us, but it is also punishing us for our economic success. It is reducing our capacity
to fund infrastructure in the future by cutting our share of goods and services tax revenue from 10 per cent in
2006-07 to a projected 7.5 per cent in 2010-11. The Leader of the Opposition ought to be concerned about this
because he claims that his party has a chance to be the alternative government in the next parliamentary term. I
do not think his party has a chance, but that is his claim. Whatever party is in government in the next
parliamentary term, it will be seeing a $1.4 billion cut in funding to our state as a result of this reduction in our
share of GST.
We all know that the commonwealth collects more tax in Western Australia. The Premier has indicated that in
his view Peter Costello thinks that the Western Australian economy is a giant automatic teller machine. I would
like to elaborate. From his point of view, it is an ATM with no daily limit on withdrawals. The commonwealth
government collects $30 billion worth of tax in this state and spends $25 billion here. Its surplus out of Western
Australia is $5 billion. Does it spend that surplus here in Western Australia? No; it takes that $5 billion and
spends it in other states.
Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: I say to the member for Avon that the commonwealth government pork-barrels National
Party marginal electorates on the eastern seaboard. This subsidy from Western Australia to the rest of the
federation is the largest per capita subsidy in the country. New South Wales and Victoria, on a per capita basis
on the same analysis, also subsidise the rest of the country. Our subsidy per capita is the largest of all the states.
It amounts to $2 400 per Western Australian per year. Despite the subsidy, the federal government short-
changes us on infrastructure. For example, the state government provides 69.8 per cent of total government
health funding, excluding patient revenues. The commonwealth’s share is 30.2 per cent. We get 10.3 per cent of
AusLink funding, despite the fact that we have 22 per cent of the roads.
The real issue in this forthcoming federal election is the issue of Western Australia getting its fair share of
returns from our economic development. We have had no response whatsoever from John Howard and Peter
Costello, but Kevin Rudd has listened to the needs of this state and he has promised us 25 per cent of the Gorgon
royalties for Western Australian infrastructure. He is listening. The other lot do not care.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: I call the members for Avon and Roe to order.
                                   REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS
6.       Mr B.J. GRYLLS to the Premier:
I refer to the Premier’s strong endorsement of federal Labor’s plan to quarantine $100 million in royalties from
the future Gorgon and Pluto project to meet Western Australia’s infrastructure demands. Given that Gorgon and
Pluto royalties will not come on-stream for years, why does he not have a similar policy to quarantine a
percentage of the state’s existing royalty flow of $2.5 billion to meet regional infrastructure needs where demand
is at a crisis point and these funds are immediately available?
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied:
I am not sure that I quite followed the Leader of the National Party’s line of logic. We are talking about Gorgon
and Pluto royalties. Is he talking about royalties from resource projects in general?
6120                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Mr B.J. Grylls: The state government currently gets a $2.5 billion royalty flow. Why don’t you quarantine
some of that for regional infrastructure?
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I do not see the logic. The question is whether regional Western Australia gets
sufficient return for the amount of wealth that is generated from those regions. For example, the Barrow Island -
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: I call the members for Roe and Murray to order.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Barrow Island is a vastly different concept to the state of Western Australia. If we
take the Leader of the National Party’s logic to its natural extreme we will spend the entire proceeds of the
royalties that flow from the Gorgon project on Barrow Island. That would be a rather foolish over-expenditure.
Mr T.K. Waldron interjected.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: It is, exactly; that is how simplistic it is. We need to ensure that the state government
gets a fair share of the royalties that flow from projects in this state that are of national significance, and there
has never been recognition from the current federal government that we should, and there is recognition from the
alternative government. The Leader of the National Party just acknowledged that in his question and that is
good. He acknowledged that the federal Labor alternative government -
Mr B.J. Grylls interjected.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: He acknowledged that the federal Labor alternative government has recognised that
there is a strong case for royalty flows into Western Australia from these projects. I agree with the Leader of the
National Party; that is one of the reasons we will support Kevin Rudd, and I am glad the Leader of the National
Party will also. He will have to concede that the alternative provides us with nothing - does it? Of course,
within the state jurisdiction there is always the challenge of providing sufficient resources for infrastructure in
regional WA, and, as we have debated many times in this Parliament before, there has never been a state
government that has done more for regional Western Australia than the one that is in power now.
Several members interjected.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Is the member for Avon still a member of the National Party? That was the party that,
when in government, saw the complete and utter destruction of the grain freight rail network, as far as the state
goes. It saw the deterioration of the Western Power network in his own electorate. He stood around and said
nothing while the Western Power network in his electorate deteriorated to the point at which the poles were
catching fire and destroying farms.
An opposition member interjected.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Massive backlog! There was a massive backlog of infrastructure spend required in
Western Australia. At last we have a government that is stepping up to the plate.
                                   REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS
7.       Mr B.J. GRYLLS to the Premier:
I have a supplementary question. Why does the Premier criticise the federal government for using Western
Australia as an ATM when that is exactly what he does to regional WA?
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied:
Let me try to take another tack.
Mr B.J. Grylls: $2.5 billion in royalties - no housing, no land, no health delivery and no education.
Several members interjected.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: How long have I got, Mr Speaker?
Mr B.J. Grylls interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order! I know the Leader of the National Party has asked the question and I know he likes
hearing his voice; however, the Premier has not uttered a word and the Leader of the National Party has spoken
for about five minutes.
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The Leader of the National Party is an enthusiastic participant in public debate. When
he has been around a little longer to educate himself sufficiently, he will start making some sensible comments
instead of the nonsense he is spouting at the moment.
                           TEACHER SHORTAGE - GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES
8.       Mr P.W. ANDREWS to the Minister for Education and Training:
Will the minister please outline to the house the latest groundbreaking state government initiatives aimed at
solving the teacher shortage?
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6121

Mr M. McGOWAN replied:
I thank the member for Southern River for the question. Indeed, the initiatives that I announced over the past
10 days or so are groundbreaking. We have announced unilaterally that we will increase the pay for graduate
teachers by $3 500, without reference to any negotiations with the union.
Mr T. Buswell interjected.
The SPEAKER: I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order.
Mr M. McGOWAN: That means that, at the start of next year, graduate teachers will be paid more than
$50 000 and that will put graduates teachers in WA among the ranks of the highest paid in Australia. In addition
to that, if they are prepared to go to certain areas throughout the state they will receive allowances of up to
$20 000 in their first year out of university. There is more: on top of that, we announced a series of scholarships
that are going to be available for people at university to apply for; indeed, 1 300 scholarships up to the value of
$60 000 over one year if teachers are prepared to go to locations in which we need them.
Both of these initiatives are about getting enough teachers into the workforce, encouraging university students to
get into education and providing incentives to young people to teach in country Western Australia. We are
offering the most generous initiatives in Australia to get teachers to teach in the country. We make no apologies
for doing that because we believe that Western Australian students and teachers deserve a good deal.
In addition, I have approached Julie Bishop on a number of occasions about a range of matters concerning what
the commonwealth government can do to assist the situation of teachers in this state. All I have ever received
from her is complete and utter negativity. All the commonwealth government ever does is incessantly and
negatively run down the state education systems. It runs down the teaching workforce and comes up with
whacky ideas about how teachers should be paid. The federal government’s ideas would result in a reduction of
pay for teachers. That is not the way to go. The way to go is the way suggested by the federal opposition. I
welcome a constructive relationship with the federal government on these major issues, but we have never had
that type of relationship with Julie Bishop. I have had a constructive relationship with Andrew Robb, funnily
enough, but Julie Bishop has offered no constructive suggestions and has not provided any positive assistance. If
the federal opposition wins government, it will offer an opportunity for the state and commonwealth
governments to work together on these significant issues. It has proposed a reduction in HECS for students who
study maths and science and who want to become teachers. The initiatives that have been put forward by
Mr Stephen Smith and Kevin Rudd would do the world of good for our education system and I look forward to
implementing those initiatives in conjunction with them.
                     ATTORNEY GENERAL - SPEECHES PROVIDED BY LOBBYISTS
9.       Ms S.E. WALKER to the Attorney General:
Welcome back from holidays, Attorney General. You do not look very refreshed. Recently we have heard
revelations from Mr Doug Solomon that the Attorney General read verbatim into this Parliament the speech
notes regarding the finance brokers issue that were provided to him by Mr Solomon as a lobbyist.
(1)      Can the Attorney General confirm that is the case?
(2)      On how many other occasions has the Attorney General read speeches in this Parliament that were
         provided by lobbyists?
(3)      Given that these revelations come on top of the massive failings of the Attorney General in his
         portfolios, why should the Attorney General keep his job?
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
(1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. When the former Premier, Geoff Gallop, gave me responsibility
        for the consumer affairs portfolio in mid to late 2009 -
Mr R.F. Johnson: 2009! You are getting ahead of yourself!
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am. From mid to late 1999 until the last occasion on which I raised the finance brokers
issue in Parliament when I was in opposition, which was on 14 November 2000, the issue of finance brokers and
the failings of the then Liberal government had been raised on 38 separate days. Over the course of just over a
year, either by means of moving a matter of public interest, asking a question or during debate on particular bills
that were before the Parliament, I raised the question of finance brokers every second sitting day from 17 August
1999 to 14 November 2000. Not only did I raise that issue on every second sitting day, but also the sources of
information upon which I relied were diverse. My primary source of information was Denise Brailey, who is
well known to most members of this place as the consumer advocate who brought this issue to public
prominence in the first place. I also received information from Doug Solomon and from -
Ms S.E. Walker: He is a lobbyist.
6122                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Mr J.A. McGINTY: No, he is a lawyer.
Ms S.E. Walker: You can be a lawyer and a lobbyist.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will come to that. I also received a lot of information from the victims of the finance
broking scandal. I met many of them in their own homes and a number of them visited my electorate office and
gave me information. What we did from August 1999 to November 2000 is a very good illustration of what a
good opposition is. Every second day that we came in here we took Doug Shave to task. He lost his seat in the
subsequent election, substantially as a result of the work that we did, and because of his failings as a minister.
I also received information from other sources.
Ms S.E. Walker: Did you credit them as well?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I did credit Doug Solomon. Let me read an extract from Hansard. This is me speaking -
         I know better than most people in this house what went on in the finance broking scandal in the 1990s.
         I met with a large number of the investors. I worked very closely with Denise Brailey and Doug
         Solomon. Those members who were in the house during the late 1990s will remember vividly that
         almost every week another scandalous case was brought to the attention of the Western Australian
         public through this house.
Mr T. Buswell: When was that?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Last year, before this issue was raised and became public.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order, members!
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I give that as one example of where I constantly acknowledged the role of Doug Solomon
in providing assistance. However, it was not just Doug Solomon; it was a range of other people as well. Let me
make this point. What is at stake here is really a question of motivation. There was no party powerbroker
writing speeches for me; there was no commercial interest writing speeches for me - that is, people who stood to
gain. Doug Solomon at that stage was acting on a pro bono basis.
Mr T. Buswell: How many speeches did you have written for you?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I wrote the overwhelming bulk of them myself.
Mr T. Buswell: You just said that people were writing speeches for you!
Mr J.A. McGINTY: No, I did not. Listen to what I am saying.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order, members!
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I did what is required of a good opposition - that is, do its homework, get information
from various sources, and be able to bring that information into the house - for the very simple reason that my
motivation was to see justice done for the thousands of finance brokers’ victims whom the former government
had turned its back on.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Nedlands to order for the first time.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: It really comes down to a question of motivation. My motivation was to look after the
interests of those thousands of Western Australians, mainly elderly, who were being done over by finance
brokers, with their connections with the Liberal Party, including the brother of the Premier of the day, who was
one of them, and who was rightly castigated in this house for what he did. It resulted in Doug Shave losing his
seat. On occasions, Doug Solomon provided me with very comprehensive notes. On other occasions, it was
material that I gleaned from the victims themselves. I brought all that information into the house. My
motivation was - unlike the members of the Liberal Party - not to support a powerbroker, and not to support a
private commercial interest from a lobbyist, but to look after these people whose interests were being neglected
by the former government.
                                      NATIONAL WATER INITIATIVE
10.      Mr J.R. QUIGLEY to the Minister for Water Resources:
Given the close of commonwealth government decision making with the calling of the federal election, can the
minister advise the house of Western Australia’s share of the federal government’s $2 billion water fund?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
I thank the member for his question. We can now, with the close of decision making by the federal government,
look to what is Western Australia’s share of the Australian government’s water fund. The total allocation to
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6123

Western Australia out of that $2 billion water fund, and the three different programs within that fund, is
$51.3 million. That is actually less than three per cent of that $2 billion water fund. I think it is an absolute
disgrace that this state, which comprises one-third of the land mass and 10 per cent of the population of this
nation, and which provides about one-third of the material exports of the whole of Australia, will be getting less
than three per cent of the federal government’s Australian water fund. It behoves all members of this Parliament
to stand up for Western Australia. Whether it is cricket, football or a range of other sports, I am always
barracking for Western Australia. When it comes to this Parliament and making sure that the people of Western
Australia get their fair share, that is certainly something that we should all stand up for. Western Australians
have not been getting their fair share out of the Howard government. That is absolutely clear. I am astounded
that the Leader of the Opposition would actually side with the commonwealth government against the interests
of Western Australia. Only last night, on the ABC News at 7.00 o’clock, the Leader of the Opposition said -
         They’ve signed the national water initiative, they need to come up with projects that satisfy the criteria
         of the national water initiative, and they’ve failed on all fronts.
Perhaps the Leader of the Opposition is not aware of the Harvey Water cooperative, which has been lauded -
Mr P.D. Omodei: Which was in place before the National Water Initiative was signed!
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Yes, but it needs money to be completed.
Mr P.D. Omodei: It is not a new project!
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: It does not have to be. Why can the Leader of the Opposition not stand up for Western
Australia? The Prime Minister and Malcolm Turnbull have gone around Australia and have given speeches in
Brisbane about how good the Harvey Water cooperative is and what an ideal model it is. Other states have
funded similar programs.
Mr P.D. Omodei: It was an initiative of the former government, not you.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Why can the Leader of the Opposition not stand up for Western Australia?
Mr P.D. Omodei: Why can’t you just do your job?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is sounding more and more like a quisling. He should
stand up for Western Australia. Then he will not have this bloke so close with a knife in his back. Get a bit of
status! Stand up for Western Australia! The Leader of the Opposition should not be a quisling. It is about time
we got a fair share. Members of this side of the house will fight for Western Australia. It is a pity that members
opposite are just quislings for the national government and do not stand up for Western Australia.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order, members!
                          MINISTER FOR WATER RESOURCES - BRIAN BURKE
11.      Mr J.H.D. DAY to the Minister for Water Resources:
I refer the minister to his maiden speech in this house, in which he said, among other things -
         To the former Premier, Brian Burke, I owe a special debt of thanks.
(1)      What exactly has the minister done over his parliamentary career to repay that special debt of thanks?
(2)      Can the minister explain why Mr Paul Frewer became acting head of the Department of Water under
         the minister, despite not being on the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards’ short list for the
         position?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
(1)-(2) I think the member is under some misunderstanding in that he said that Mr Frewer was not on the short
        list of candidates. Mr Frewer was already in the acting position. Someone had to be put into the acting
        position. I think he has done a very good job as the Acting Director General of the Department of
        Water.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order, members!
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Members opposite do not understand. There was not a short list in progress when he was
put into that position. When a new department is set up, someone is brought in from another agency and that
person goes through the process, and the process continues. The issue is that he has done a very good job and
there has been national recognition of the way in which the department has been operating, and that recognition
has come from a range of sources.
6124                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Mr C.J. Barnett interjected.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Cottesloe to order for the first time.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: The issue then is my relationship with Brian Burke, and that goes back to the fact that I
worked for him on his campaigns back in the 1970s. I worked for him as a public officer within government in
the mid-1980s.
Mr J.H.D. Day interjected.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE: Does the member want to hear the answer or not? If he wants to hear the answer, he
might listen for a moment.
I was preselected in 1988 and I was elected in 1989. Brian Burke was no longer Premier or a member of
Parliament at that time. However, he certainly played a role in my preselection because he did deals all over the
place. It was only later that I came to recognise that often those deals were caught up in his ego and what he
wanted to do, rather than what might have been good for the state. I was in this house when Brian Burke gave
his final speech, and members of the National and Liberal Parties stood and applauded him. It was a standing
ovation. It was not just I who was gullible and sucked in by Brian Burke; many members on the other side were
also sucked in by him. I benefited from the fact that he had political power because I was preselected
unopposed, and that would not have happened without his patronage. However, I soon realised that he was
actually more about his own agenda, rather than what I thought was good for Western Australia. Therefore, over
a period, which goes back many years now, I divorced myself from anything to do with Brian Burke. Part of my
electorate has always included what was then his electorate, so I have received phone calls for assistance from
people who were friends of Brian. If I knew those people, I would take up the issue, but as of about six or seven
years ago, I would never take up anything on the recommendation of Brian Burke because his devious web has
sucked in too many people on both sides of the chamber and throughout Western Australia, and I do not want to
play any part in that web of deception.
                        SMALL BUSINESS - HOWARD GOVERNMENT SUPPORT
12.      Mrs J. HUGHES to the Minister for Small Business:
The Prime Minister has claimed that Labor is bad for small business. What has the Howard government actually
done to support small business in Western Australia?
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order!
Ms M.M. QUIRK replied:
I thank the member for the question. The truth of the matter is that the small business sector is struggling under
the current federal government.
Mr T. Buswell: Can you define net profit?
The SPEAKER: I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time.
Ms M.M. QUIRK: In particular, it is struggling under a range of time pressures that have been imposed by the
federal government. More than half the respondents to the August MYOB Ltd survey indicated that red tape,
including business activity statements and goods and services tax compliance requirements, had increased over
the past three years, with around one-third of the businesses indicating that they had a lot more red tape
compared with three years ago.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order, member for Nedlands.
Ms M.M. QUIRK: This burden often falls -
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order, member for Carine.
Ms M.M. QUIRK: - on the partners of the 186 000 Western Australian small business operators.
The SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Nedlands and the member for Roe to order.
Ms M.M. QUIRK: This time impost takes precious time away from families. The federal government must
bear responsibility for making life more complex for time-poor small businesses. GST compliance, BAS
statements and now WorkChoices have made life for small business operators so complex that they are having to
waste time trying to make sense of it all.
The SPEAKER: Order! I call the member for Avon and the member for Carine to order.
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6125

Ms M.M. QUIRK: That is time that small business operators could have been spending on growing their
businesses and using for profitable activities, such as marketing and customer relations.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order! Member for Stirling!
Ms M.M. QUIRK: One very tangible indication of where the federal government has failed to deliver to small
business is amendments to the Trade Practices Act. All states have lobbied the federal government, as have
small businesses, for there to be changes to the Trade Practices Act to outlaw predatory pricing practices and
unconscionable conduct. The federal government has been very reluctant over a number of years to bolster the
Trade Practices Act to outlaw predatory pricing. Perhaps one might speculate that it is a case of the Howard
government being afraid of upsetting its big-business friends. In the 11 years of the Howard government can
small business operators really say that they are better off?
                                                  Point of Order
Mr C.J. BARNETT: I refer to standing orders relating to the reading of material in this house. It is beyond me
how the minister can have a written response, which she is reading out, to a question that by definition is without
notice. I would ask, Mr Speaker, that you direct her to answer as she sees the question coming and not read out
the answer.
The SPEAKER: It has been traditional in this place that people do not read material directly into Hansard.
However, the usual practice in this place is that extensive notes can be used. Ministers are quite often briefed to
an excessive level, but they are entitled to read from notes. While I am on my feet, I call the member for Stirling
to order for the first time.
          ATTORNEY GENERAL - CONTACT WITH DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
13.      Mr T. BUSWELL to the Attorney General:
I refer to the Attorney General’s comments in Parliament on 20 September this year -
         . . . the DPP is an independent office bearer. Twenty years ago, it was decided to separate that office
         from the then Crown Law Department to ensure complete independence in the office of the DPP . . .
Notwithstanding his powers under the Director of Public Prosecutions Act -
(1)      Why did the Attorney General call the Director of Public Prosecutions at home, after hours, to try to
         influence criminal contempt proceedings against the editor of The West Australian and what exactly
         was said in this conversation?
(2)      Is it the position of his government that, as Attorney General, he should be able to contact the DPP and
         seek to influence his decision-making regarding a matter in which the Attorney General has a conflict
         of interest; namely, his dispute with The West Australian?
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order, members!
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
(1)-(2) Members might recall that late last year three trials were aborted in a period of two months, one at the
        instigation of the member for Nedlands.
Ms S.E. Walker interjected.
The SPEAKER: I ask the Attorney General to take a seat. I call the member for Nedlands to order for the third
and final time.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: One of the trials was aborted at the instigation of the member for Nedlands.
Mr T. Buswell: Hey, I asked the question!
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes.
That is the context for the events that then transpired. Judge Healy, a very experienced District Court judge,
aborted the third trial as a result of a letter that was published in The West Australian. He described the
publication in The West as “unbelievable and destructive”. To quote Judge Healy at the time -
         . . . to publish a letter in the Letters column of the only newspaper available to most people in Western
         Australia on a day when all the evidence has been completed and addresses are to commence seems to
         me to be an incredibly bad system of being able to edit a newspaper.
He went on to say -
         . . . the director of public prosecutions should seriously consider taking proceedings against The West
         Australian for the publication of this letter. It seems to me to be a gross contempt of court.
6126                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

That was the reason Judge Healy aborted the third trial in a two-month period at enormous cost both to the
justice system and to the dollars invested in the system, as well as inconveniencing witnesses and others
involved in that trial. I rang Robert Cock, as I do from time to time, on his mobile phone and asked him whether
he was proposing to do anything about the report that had appeared in the media on that issue. We discussed
whether action should be taken. Robert Cock advised me that he would be initiating contempt of court
proceedings against The West Australian and its editor. To suggest that there was any pressure is totally wrong
and inappropriate. As I do from time to time on matters of major public interest, I will discuss these matters with
the DPP. On that occasion we discussed whether action should be taken; and, if so, who should take it.
Mr T. Buswell: What happened with that action?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is aware of the decision last week, I think it was,
when three Court of Appeal judges ruled that Judge Healy was wrong in aborting that trial. That is a matter of
public record. It was on 16 December last year that I spoke with the Director of Public Prosecutions when he
advised me that he would be initiating action against the editor of The West Australian in response to the call that
was made by Judge Healy.
Mr T. Buswell: What did you say to him in the conversation?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have already described to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition what I said. We
discussed whether action should be taken; if so, who should take it; and those sorts of matters. I supported the
action of the Director of Public Prosecutions in prosecuting The West Australian and its editor.
Mr T. Buswell: Was Judge Healy wrong?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes, quite clearly.
Mr T. Buswell: So why did you use his arguments earlier to substantiate your position?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Judge Healy aborted the trial at enormous cost to taxpayers. Judge Healy recommended
to the DPP -
Mr T. Buswell interjected.
The SPEAKER: Order, members!
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Judge Healy recommended to the DPP that he consider initiating contempt action. The
DPP agreed with that request from Judge Healy. He initiated the action. One of the good things to come out of
this is, I believe, that we now have greater certainty in the law and that this will result in fewer trials being
aborted, which will be to the benefit of everyone.
                FIONA STANLEY HOSPITAL CONSTRUCTION ACCOUNT BILL 2007
                                                      Assent
Message from the Governor received and read notifying assent to the bill.
                                                      BILLS
                                                  Appropriations
Messages from the Governor received and read recommending appropriations for the purposes of the following
bills -
1.       Industrial and Related Legislation Amendment Bill 2007.
2.       Employment Dispute Resolution Bill 2007.
3.       Contractual Benefits Bill 2007.
PROCEDURE AND PRIVILEGES COMMITTEE - INQUIRY INTO MISCONDUCT ALLEGATIONS
                                              Statement by Speaker
THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling): I advise members that in accordance with section 27A and 27B of the
Corruption and Crime Commission Act 2003, I placed before the Procedure and Privileges Committee
allegations of misconduct referred to me by the Corruption and Crime Commission.
On 21 September 2007, the committee resolved that it would carry out an inquiry into the allegations under the
provisions of section 27B(2), the committee is obliged to direct the commission to act on its behalf to undertake
the inquiry. A direction to the commission was issued accordingly on the same day.
                                                PROSTITUTION
                                                     Petition
MR P.D. OMODEI (Warren-Blackwood - Leader of the Opposition) [3.01 pm]: I present the following
petition, which contains six signatures -
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6127

         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 prostitution is a dangerous and harmful activity which provides no social
         benefits to Western Australian communities and families. Prostitution degrades young women; it
         causes lasting psychological, spiritual and physical harm; it leads to drug addiction as a coping
         mechanism and returning to normal family life after prostitution is almost impossible.
         For the above reasons we respectfully ask the Legislative Assembly to vote against any Bill
         implementing the recommendations of the Prostitution Law Reform Working Group as set out in their
         report of January 2007.
         In particular, we respectfully ask the Legislative Assembly to:
                  -        vote against any decriminalisation of sexual services businesses operating in Western
                                    Australia;
                  -        continue empowering local governments to prohibit the operation of sexual services
                                   businesses;
                  -        ban all advertising and open soliciting for prostitution;
                  -        create appropriate laws about the gathering of evidence and the ability to search
                                    premises that will empower police to prosecute successfully;
                  -        provide financial assistance to organisations offering escape and rehabilitation to
                                   prostitutes; -
                  -        increase resources to stop the trafficking of women from overseas into Western
                                    Australia.
         And your petitioners as in duty bound, will ever pray.
[See petition 256.]
                                                PAPERS TABLED
Papers were tabled and ordered to lie upon the table of the house.
                                                      BILLS
                                           Notices of Motions to Introduce
1.       Security and Related Activities (Control) Amendment Bill 2007.
Notice of motion given by Mr J.C. Kobelke (Minister for Police and Emergency Services).
2.       Cross-border Justice Bill 2007.
Notice of motion given by Mr J.A. McGinty (Attorney General).
3.       Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Bill 2007.
4.       Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Levy Bill 2007.
Notices of motions given by Mr D.A. Templeman (Minister for the Environment).
5.       Lobbying Disclosure and Accountability Bill 2007.
Notice of motion given by Dr E. Constable.
                 SELECT COMMITTEE INTO WATER SUPPLY AND MANAGEMENT
                                                  Notice of Motion
Mr P.D. Omodei (Leader of the Opposition) gave notice that at the next sitting of the house he would move -
         (1)      That this house calls on the state Labor government to refer all matters pertaining to its policy
                  on water supply and management to a parliamentary select committee to inquire into and
                  report on -
                  (a)      proposed legislative changes;
                  (b)      the timetable of legislation and implementation;
                  (c)      proposals for licensing of water supplies;
                  (d)      the rationale for any change of riparian rights;
                  (e)      proposals for water resource management charges;
6128                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

                  (f)      proclamation of areas of the state and any anomalies within the proposed
                           proclamations;
                  (g)      proposed governance of licensing and management;
                  (h)      whether the National Water Initiative compels Western Australia to implement new
                           water and resource management charges;
                  (i)      whether a “one size fits all” will work to the benefit of Western Australian farmers
                           and landholders;
                  (j)      why the state government has excluded backyard bores in the metropolitan area from
                           any charges on the basis that they are not affecting ground water levels;
                  (k)      the uniformity of government proposals across Western Australia;
                  (l)      how the government proposals will affect springs on private property and the
                           definition of springs;
                  (m)      what is the actual cost of licensing and management in this state;
                  (n)      whether self-management of proclaimed areas is a more appropriate model;
                  (o)      what services are provided to landholders by government in relation to water
                           licensing and management;
                  (p)      off-stream dams and dams used for aesthetic values;
                  (q)      cooperative and independent boards and their role in water management;
                  (r)      the effect of the Labor government’s proposed water charging regime on farm
                           viability, householders, pensioners (senior citizens) and not-for-profit organisations;
                  (s)      whether it would be more equitable for any water-charging regime to be met by the
                           consolidated account;
                  (t)      a phased implementation of fees to be introduced over the next 10 years if approved
                           by Parliament;
                  (u)      transfer of water within and between catchments; and
                  (v)      any other matter relating to the state Labor government’s proposal to introduce water
                           licensing and management fees.
         (2)      That the select committee report to this house by 30 June 2008.
                        BOTANIC GARDENS AND PARKS AMENDMENT BILL 2006
                                           Restoration to Notice Paper
On motion by Ms S.E. Walker, resolved -
         That the Botanic Gardens and Parks Amendment Bill 2006 be restored to the point it reached prior to its
         removal from the notice paper on Tuesday, 28 August 2007.
          POLICE (COMPENSATION FOR INJURED OFFICERS) AMENDMENT BILL 2006
                                      Restoration to Notice Paper - Motion
MR M.J. COWPER (Murray) [3.10 pm]: I move -
         That the Police (Compensation for Injured Officers) Amendment Bill 2006 be restored to the point it
         reached prior to its removal from the notice paper on Tuesday, 25 September 2007.
Do I have an opportunity to speak to that motion?
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): Yes, the member for Murray can speak to that motion.
Mr M.J. COWPER: Members will know that I introduced this bill over 12 months ago, in August or
thereabouts last year, and it has sat on the table for 12 months. We had some debate about it. The government
did not oppose this bill. However, I want to speak to the reasons that this bill should stay on the notice paper. It
is a bill of significant importance, and one that is very dear and close to me. I gave an undertaking to my
colleagues and I gave an undertaking in this place that I would not let this bill go, because it affects so many of
my former colleagues. We finished the debate 12 months ago. It finished after the second reading, because the
bill was awaiting appropriations from the Governor; yet those appropriations never occurred. The only thing we
managed to get was an undertaking by the minister that a group of people would get together and look at some
future legislation. However, 12 months has transpired and nothing has materialised. I will not let this bill go.
                                     [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                          6129

One of my very diligent constituents came to see me some time ago. He was very concerned, as many of us are,
about the plight of one Senior Constable Glenn Murray. Members might recollect that Glenn Murray was one of
those officers who were seriously injured in a traffic crash in Madora Bay in July 10 years ago. I remember the
day vividly. I was at the back of my house building a patio when I heard a siren go, followed by another siren
and another siren. I learnt after that -
The ACTING SPEAKER: If members want to have meetings, would they have them outside, please?
Mr M.J. COWPER: The sad part about it is that a female officer named Jane Kennaugh was killed - a very fine
community policing officer. As a side issue, just two weeks ago - I will stray a little, if you do not mind,
Mr Acting Speaker - there was the dedication of a park in Madora Bay in the name of Jane Kennaugh. I think
that is a very touching tribute. I had the chance to see Jane’s children there on the day, and they were very proud
to see this magnificent park in Madora Bay. It is in a part of Lakelands. It has a nice shade sail and playground
area for young people. It is very fitting that it is named after Jane Kennaugh.
This constituent of mine wants me to remind members of Parliament who occupied this place in 1997 of this
issue that was debated here when the Court government was in power. At that time, many members of today’s
government sat on this side of the house and fired bullets at the government of the day, saying that it had done
very little. Members will see that I have in my hand copies of the letters that were sent to every member of
Parliament in 1997 and their responses. I think it is appropriate to reinforce that among the reasons that this bill
should not be removed from the notice paper - I will continue to ensure that it is not removed from the notice
paper - are some of the responses that came not only by way of letter, but also by way of the debate recorded in
the Hansard of the day.
In short, I believe the government of the day was found wanting when it came to this matter. However, what is
even more damning is the fact that we have a government that has had an opportunity to right what was a wrong,
and still has an opportunity to do so, but it has failed to do that. It is interesting to see the politics that are played
in this place from time to time. However, when it comes down to real life issues, we expect very much of our
police officers. We expect them to go out and put their lives on the line, day in and day out, without a safety net.
Only last night I was a guest at a Rotary club meeting - it was not my Rotary club - and I spoke about the fact
that police officers do not have workers’ compensation. The people there could not believe it. In fact, some of
the responses of some of the members of Parliament in 1997 were very similar; they could not understand why
there was no workers’ compensation way back then. I will take the opportunity to read some of those letters in
response.
I think it is worthwhile that we acknowledge the work of Mr Pat McGovern. Pat McGovern is not aligned with
anyone. He is not a member of the Liberal Party and he is not a member of the Labor Party. He is just a very
concerned citizen. He cannot understand why Tracey Murray is in a situation in which she has to look after her
tetraplegic husband for the rest of her life - a life sentence. At the time, there was an ex gratia payment of
something like $80 000. Everyone in this place would agree that that was nowhere near enough to see that
family through.
This bill should never be removed from the notice paper in this place. It must be addressed. A letter was sent to
Mr John Cowdell.
The ACTING SPEAKER: This is not an opportunity for the member to read out letters or do what he would
do in a second reading debate. This is an opportunity for the member to get across the reason that this legislation
should be restored to the notice paper. Therefore, reading out letters does not come within the framework that
the member is dealing with at the moment.
Mr M.J. COWPER: I understand that I am talking to the motion to have this bill reinstated to the notice paper;
is that correct?
The ACTING SPEAKER: Yes, but the member cannot talk as though it is a second reading contribution. He
is just asking that it be restored to the notice paper.
Mr M.J. COWPER: It should be restored to the notice paper in this place, and that has been reinforced by the
comments made in this place by members of Parliament.
The ACTING SPEAKER: I have received advice that this is not an opportunity for the member to do that. If
the member wants to go against the Chair, he can. However, that is the advice I have been given.
Mr M.J. COWPER: In that light, I seek leave to table these letters and leave them on the table, so that every
member will have the opportunity to revisit what they said more than 10 years ago; in particular, the then
shadow Minister for Police and Emergency Services, the member for Midland, and the current Minister for
Police and Emergency Services, the member for Balcatta, so that they can see what they said they were going to
do when in opposition. The fact is that a comment was made by certain members on the other side that they
6130                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

were going to introduce a private member’s bill, but it never occurred. Some of those people who responded
have now retired and moved on.
The ACTING SPEAKER: Does the member wish to table those papers?
Mr M.J. COWPER: I will do that directly, Mr Acting Speaker. The point is that a lot of promises have been
made in the past and not much has been done to follow through on this matter. My understanding is that a
working party was put together to develop some legislation to be brought into this place to deal with this
outstanding situation. One of the biggest problems that the Commissioner of Police and the government have in
attracting and retaining police officers in this state is that morale is slipping rapidly. How can we possibly
encourage some young people to join the Western Australia Police when there is no safety net for them while
doing their job? If they get a call to respond urgently to an accident, why would they put their lives at risk or put
the life of a member of the public at risk? At the end of the day, if there is a crash on the way to that accident,
the police officer will be held accountable and put through the mill if someone is injured as a result, as was the
case with our friend Senior Constable Glenn Murray. He has to live with that for the rest of his life.
This bill should be reinstated because two children do not have a mother. This bill should be reinstated because
Keith Wagstaff has to spend $300 a month on medication to stop him from fitting. He retired from the job in
1991 but prior to that when he felt a fit coming on he would close the door to his office and thrash around on the
floor and then return to his chair. His fitting attacks were the result of injuries he sustained while on duty in
Halls Creek. He did not have any workers’ compensation. He is now at home and when he feels a fit coming
on, he puts a mouthguard into his mouth and sits on his bed and thrashes around until it subsides. That is one
reason that this bill should be restored to the notice paper. I will not let it be removed from the notice paper.
I have countless stories of police officers who have sustained horrific injuries while on duty. One officer who
was driving back to the police station sustained injuries in a car crash caused by somebody in the vehicle
reaching over and grabbing hold of the steering wheel. That is another reason that this bill should be restored to
the notice paper. These officers have sustained physical injuries while on duty.
The instances I have given are only the tip of the iceberg. These people have been scarred for life. Police
officers are asked to do things that citizens of Western Australia should not have to endure. Over time these
officers will be scarred mentally. Heaven knows, the member for Yokine or I might need this legislation
because we have been long-serving police officers. All of a sudden the roosters may come home to roost! That
is another reason that the bill should be restored to the notice paper.
Yesterday afternoon I was surprised to receive a telephone call from Sergeant Shane Gray from Karratha. He
rang to thank me for the letter I wrote to him a month or so ago. Sergeant Gray was the guy who responded to a
call about a drive-off at a service station just south of Karratha. He did not know that the person he approached
was a dual murderer from Victoria. It is appropriate that the coronial inquest found that officer acted above and
beyond the call of duty. His training came to the fore and he is very lucky to be with us today because he
sustained serious injuries in the incident. He is another reason that this bill should be restored to the notice
paper. Apart from receiving physical injuries, which thankfully he has recovered from, who is to say that at
some time in the future he might not be able to cope very well and might collapse and fall into a heap? That is a
reason that this bill should be restored to the notice paper. To Sergeant Gray, his colleagues and the family of
the two Flynn sisters who were killed in Victoria -
Mr R.F. Johnson: They were murdered in cold blood.
Mr M.J. COWPER: The member is correct - they were callously murdered. I say to those people whom I
mentioned that this officer is a hero and he will be recognised as such in the future. He asked me to keep up the
good work to get this bill debated. That was only yesterday and it is another reason that this bill should be
restored to the notice paper.
I will tell members about Christian Raymond Burgess who was in 2001 the senior sergeant police officer in
charge of Newman Police Station on what was the saddest day in the history of Western Australia Police. It lost
some of its officers in a plane crash. Christian now drives buses in Karratha for a friend of mine, Ben Doolan.
After that plane crash he left Newman and went elsewhere because he had trouble coming to terms with the fact
that he was the officer in charge at the time of the crash and made decisions for which, despite the findings of the
crash investigators, he felt responsible. He has been burdened with that for some time. He was living in South
Yunderup for a short time. He was very keen on racehorses, but he lost interest in life. Only recently I heard
from his wife, Christine, that he now has a part-time job driving a bus in Karratha. He is returning to his old self
and is happy again now that he is out of the police service. It is another reason that this bill should be restored to
the notice paper.
I put this bill together with a member of the WA Police Union of Workers and two lawyers who were contracted
from Talbert Olivier. I deliberately left some openings in the bill to encourage the government to take up the
cudgels and, with the opposition, in a bipartisan way, come up with legislation that would fix this problem.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6131

When I table these letters members will be able to see that the letters with the blue tags are from Liberal
members, those with green tags are from National Party members and those with red tags are from Labor
members. All members who were in this place at that time are complicit in failing to act. That is another reason
that this bill should be restored to the notice paper. How many more police officers do members opposite want
to see injured in the line of duty? Are we to do the right thing by the people of this state? God knows that we
can afford it.
I remember that over 12 months ago when the police service was negotiating wage increases Bill Shorten stood
on the steps of Parliament House and said, “What a disgrace,” but he did not come up with the answers.
Everybody says this sort of thing should not happen but it does and it continues to happen. I am the only
member in this place who can say that he did something for the police officers in this state because I have put a
private member’s bill together. It is more than other members in this place can say. That is the reason this bill
should not slide off the notice paper and be treated like yesterday’s newspapers. It is too serious a matter for that
to happen.
I ask those members who were in this place 10 years ago to take the time to look at what they said in Hansard on
this issue. All that it is now is rhetoric. I could read from this Hansard - it is a Groundhog Day sort of thing.
Some of the comments that were made by the then member for Midland could be repeated today. What makes
the government more complicit is that it knows there is a problem but it has failed to fix it. The government was
condemned by Bill Shorten on the steps of this place and it has still not done anything. I hope this minister has
done something. I am hearing mixed comments on what is or is not happening. I understand that a group has
been formed to look into this matter and I hope they have come up with something tangible. I hope the minister
will take the opportunity in this debate to say that there is a light at the end of the tunnel. If he does not, in
another 12 months when this bill falls off the notice paper I will repeat what I am doing today. I will not let this
bill slide off the notice paper. I will seek leave to table this correspondence, which includes a response from
Mike Dean of the Police Union. The covering letter is missing, but it was sent by Mr Pat McGovern, who is a
Western Australian citizen who wrote to every member of Parliament because he felt that an injustice had been
done. We are elected to this place to make laws for the greater good of Western Australians. Members
concerned should read these letters and tell me whether they have fulfilled their promise to their constituency.
I seek leave to table this correspondence for the remainder of today’s sitting.
[The paper was tabled for the information of members.]
Mr M.J. COWPER: I hope that the government takes heed of what I have said because this bill will not go
away.
DR G.G. JACOBS (Roe) [3.29 pm]: I was so moved by the member for Murray’s presentation, I wondered
whether I could make some comments in support of his move to restore the Police (Compensation for Injured
Officers) Amendment Bill 2006 -
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): You can talk about the restoration of the bill.
Dr G.G. JACOBS: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. As the member for Murray has rightly said, the Police
(Compensation for Injured Officers) Amendment Bill 2006 is most overdue. It is a bill to amend the Police Act
1892 to provide compensation and ongoing medical benefits for officers injured in the course of duty. An injury
suffered in the course of duty means an illness or injury sustained by a member of the police force whilst acting
in the execution of his or her duties. There could be no other job in this community that is more honourable in
ensuring the safety of our community and members of the community. In recognition of that honourable duty of
ensuring the safety of the community and community members, it is not good enough that police officers are not
compensated for injuries received in the execution of their duty, as this bill refers to.
                                      Standing Orders Suspension - Motion
Dr G.G. JACOBS: I have listened to the member for Murray and felt his frustration about how long this bill
has sat in this Parliament since he has been here and also before that. In order to get this bill dealt with urgently
so that it does not sit around for another 12 months while good men and women out there are defending us in the
community and ensuring our safety, I move -
         That so much of standing orders be suspended as is necessary to deal with the Police (Compensation for
         Injured Officers) Amendment Bill 2006 as a matter of urgency.
The ACTING SPEAKER: As this is a motion without notice to suspend standing orders, I will need to satisfy
myself that there is an absolute majority present. If I hear a dissentient voice, I will be required to divide the
Assembly.
Question put.
The ACTING SPEAKER: There being a dissentient voice, the house will divide.
6132                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Division taken with the following result -
                                                             Ayes (23)

Mr C.J. Barnett                  Mr J.H.D. Day                     Mr J.E. McGrath                 Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan          Mr B.J. Grylls                    Mr P.D. Omodei                  Ms S.E. Walker
Mr T.R. Buswell                  Dr K.D. Hames                     Mr D.T. Redman                  Mr G.A. Woodhams
Mr G.M. Castrilli                Ms K. Hodson-Thomas               Mr G. Snook                     Dr J.M. Woollard
Dr E. Constable                  Dr G.G. Jacobs                    Dr S.C. Thomas                  Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)
Mr M.J. Cowper                   Mr R.F. Johnson                   Mr M.W. Trenorden


                                                             Noes (25)

Mr P.W. Andrews                  Mr F.M. Logan                     Mr A.P. O’Gorman                Mr T.G. Stephens
Mr A.J. Carpenter                Mr J.A. McGinty                   Mr P. Papalia                   Mr D.A. Templeman
Dr J.M. Edwards                  Mr M. McGowan                     Mr J.R. Quigley                 Mr M.P. Whitely
Mrs D.J. Guise                   Ms S.M. McHale                    Ms M.M. Quirk                   Mrs J. Hughes (Teller)
Mr J.N. Hyde                     Mr A.D. McRae                     Ms J.A. Radisich
Mr J.C. Kobelke                  Mrs C.A. Martin                   Mr E.S. Ripper
Mr R.C. Kucera                   Mr M.P. Murray                    Mrs M.H. Roberts




                                                               Pairs

                                 Mr T.R. Sprigg                                        Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan
                                 Mr M.J. Birney                                        Mr S.R. Hill

Absolute majority not achieved; question thus negatived.
                                      Restoration to Notice Paper - Motion Resumed
Question put and passed.
                                     PROSTITUTION AMENDMENT BILL 2007
                                                   Consideration in Detail
Resumed from 26 September.
Clause 4: Section 1 amended -
Debate was interrupted after Dr Constable had moved the following amendment -
          Page 3, lines 5 and 6 - To delete all words after “by” and substitute -
                    deleting “Prostitution Act” and inserting instead -
                             “      Sex Services Act    ”.
Dr E. CONSTABLE: I think at this stage it might be appropriate for me to seek leave from the chamber to
withdraw the amendment standing in my name on page 11 of the notice paper with a view to replacing it with the
slightly different amendment that appears below it on the notice paper.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Dr E. CONSTABLE: I move -
          Page 3, lines 5 and 6 - To delete all words after “by” and substitute -
                    deleting “Prostitution Act” and inserting instead -
                             “      Sexual Services Act       ”.
This is a fairly obvious amendment. Throughout the bill the term “prostitution” has been replaced with the term
“sexual service”. The Attorney General has decided to do away with prostitution in the state and rename it
sexual service. He also sees that a person who runs a brothel - under this bill - will be running a “sexual service
business”. A woman who sells her body for sex - or a man for that matter - will no longer be called a prostitute.
That word is now out of our lexicon. Such a person will now be a “sex worker”. Therefore, I think it is totally
inappropriate and misleading to call this bill the Prostitution Amendment Bill 2007. The name of the act should
reflect the changes that the Attorney General is proposing. I propose this amendment to label this bill the
“Sexual Services Act”. What the Attorney General is attempting to do with the legislation - I do not necessarily
agree with what he is doing - is to make prostitution respectable. We have euphemistic terms so that
“prostitution” becomes “sexual service”; “prostitute” becomes “sex worker” and a “brothel owner” is someone
who runs a “sexual service business”. I think the Attorney General is trying to legitimise activities that cannot
be legitimised. I still think the bill should be called for what it is. Women selling their bodies is not like any
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6133

other profession. That is what the Attorney General is trying to do here. People who own or manage a brothel
are not like any other small business owner. That is my view.
The title of any legislation should adequately and accurately reflect what the bill is about. If the Attorney
General wants to rid our vocabulary of the terms “prostitute” and “prostitution” and replace them with
euphemisms, then, in my opinion, he should not use the word “prostitution” in the title of the act. It is
hypocritical and very strange to do so. Those are the main comments I want to make. I say again that the title of
any piece of legislation should reflect accurately what the legislation is about.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I respect the member for Churchlands, as she knows, but I do not agree with her
amendment at all. At the end of the day, we know what this legislation is about. I refer members to the
Australian Concise Oxford Dictionary because this debate is all about prostitutes and brothels, and the sex trade
that takes place in those places. I will give members the dictionary definition of “prostitute” -
         . . . a woman or girl who engages in sexual activity for payment. . . . male prostitute) a man or boy
         who engages in sexual activity, esp. with homosexual men, for payment. . . a person who debases
         himself or herself for personal gain.
The dictionary entry goes on and on. That is the definition of “prostitute” and “prostitution”. This is what it is.
We cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. The Attorney General might want to legitimise and, in some
way, give some sort of credence and recognisable business acumen to this trade. This is a business of trade.
This particular trade debases the people who are used for the trade. I do not believe for one minute that we
should be changing the name of the act. I also do not think that we should use the term “sex worker” anywhere
in the bill. The Attorney General might want to try to make things sound nicer than they are, but he knows what
a prostitute is and he knows what prostitutes do for money. He now wants to take away the word “pimp” and
call such people business owners or operators. He wants to make brothels legal businesses so what we have
known for years as pimps, people who have lived off the immoral earnings of other people - especially women -
are now to appear legitimate. The government and the Attorney General are bereft of moral standards. This is a
moral issue as well as a legal issue. I do not want this bill disguised in any way or form. The Attorney General
is legalising a crime. At this moment in time it is a crime that is being committed in the state. He is legalising
the crime. He has already done it with the use of cannabis and now he is doing it with prostitutes. God forbid
what the third stage will be! I must tell members that I will not stand in this place and in any way justify or
agree to or be coerced into making this issue sound less important than it is.
I oppose the amendment. I see the rationale the member for Churchlands is putting forward but I think it is
playing into the government’s hands. I suggest that the Attorney General will probably accept this amendment; I
guarantee he will. I know how he thinks.
Mr J.A. McGinty: You’re inside my mind!
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Absolutely! I know exactly how the Attorney General thinks. He is thinking, “Thank
God someone has moved this sort of amendment. Thank God for the member for Churchlands.” The member
for Churchlands is doing it for good, logical reasons that give the Attorney General an excuse to take up the
amendment. The Liberal Party does not agree with the amendment. It is not because of the logic that is involved
but because we will not agree to any diminishing of the disgraceful acts that the Attorney General is legalising
here. He will turn something that is illegal and grossly immoral into an act that is legitimate and creates a
legitimate business.
I cannot for one second agree in any way, shape or form to changing the words “prostitute” and “prostitution” to
“sex worker” and “sexual service business”. People could take the wrong meaning. There are people who may
be sex workers who are not involved in prostitution. They might be helping men of a certain age with their
erectile problems. They could well be doing that by supplying them with medication or whatever else they do.
They are not in the prostitution business; they are not involved in the business of degrading women. They are
perhaps performing a quite reasonable job in trying to help people enjoy sexual activity in their later years. We
have all seen the adverts for Viagra and all the other stuff. My computer gets bombarded with it - not as much as
it used to, but it still comes through.
Mr J.A. McGinty: I hope you don’t look at it!
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I do not because one never knows what one would be taking. I have never taken
anything, so I would not have a clue. We will not agree with this amendment.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I will also not be supporting the amendment, but not necessarily for the same reasons
outlined by the member for Hillarys. What the Attorney General is doing with this bill will not assist prostitutes
in Western Australia. I have become more aware since this bill was introduced of the issues that link prostitution
with people trafficking, with women’s rights and with the abuse of women. In relation to the words that the
member has suggested, “Sexual Services Act”, I will read from an article from the website of the English
newspaper, The Daily Telegraph.
6134                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

The article is titled -
          ‘If you don’t take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits’
The article says -
          A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing “sexual services” at a brothel in Berlin faces
          possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.
          Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners - who must pay tax
          and employee health insurance - were granted access to official databases of jobseekers.
It continues -
          Under Germany’s welfare reforms, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year
          can be forced to take an available job - including in the sex industry…
Later it says -
          “There is now nothing in the law to stop women from being sent into the sex industry,” said Merchthild
          Garweg, a lawyer from Hamburg who specialises in such cases. “The new regulations say that working
          in the sex industry is not immoral anymore, and so jobs cannot be turned down without a risk to
          benefits.”
I cannot agree with the term “sexual services”. I am very concerned about this and I am very concerned about
the trafficking issue. The federal Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Crime Commission inquired
into the trafficking of women for sexual servitude and reported -
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): Member, does this have anything to do with the amendment?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: It does, because the amendment is about sexual services.
The ACTING SPEAKER: No, it is about the name of the act. The member is getting just a little bit off the
track.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: If I am getting off track, I will certainly make sure that I come back on track,
Mr Acting Speaker.
The ACTING SPEAKER: We all hope so, member.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The amendment seeks to substitute the words “sexual services” for the word
“prostitution”. I wish to point out that the parliamentary joint committee report into the trafficking of women
indicated that an ex-Australian Federal Police agent had said that women had been trafficked to Australia for
prostitution since as early as 1975. It also said that at any given time between 1992 and 1995, there were
300 contract girls in Sydney. The then federal Attorney-General, Darryl Williams, is reported to have said that
the gross cash flow to individual organisers of the sexual services trade was some $1.2 million. As far as I am
concerned, the member for Churchlands’ amendment supports what the Attorney General wants to achieve with
this bill.
Dr E. Constable: Not at all! I said that I do not agree with his changes.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I just cannot agree with that.
The ACTING SPEAKER: Member, could you please be careful. You are hitting the microphone, and
someone’s earphones will be blown away!
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: In the New South Wales Public Health Association submission to the joint
parliamentary inquiry, the then federal Attorney-General said that the gross cash flow to organisers of the trade
could be in the region of $1 million a week. I do not think that we should be legalising brothels. We will see a
proliferation of brothels, as happened in the eastern states.
The Public Health Association submission also identified where the women used for these “sexual services” are
trafficked from - the women who provide these services that the member wants to include in the bill by way of
amendment to legalise these services. The submission indicates that it appears that most women are trafficked
from South East Asia, China, Europe, Latin America, and Burma by way of Thailand, and that women are being
trafficked to Australia in increasing numbers from South Korea. This bill not only opens up the door to more
brothels, but also increases the potential for more women to be trafficked into Australia.
Dr G.G. JACOBS: I too have a high regard for the member for Churchlands. However, I cannot quite
understand where she is coming from with her amendment. The member talks about the Attorney General
legitimising prostitution by using alternative words such as “sex worker”, “commercial sex act” and “sexual
services business”. However, the changes proposed in this amendment suggest that the member for Churchlands
is going along with the Attorney General’s changes. The member is saying, “Let’s legitimise it -
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                        6135

Dr E. Constable interjected.
The ACTING SPEAKER: Member for Churchlands!
Dr G.G. JACOBS: “Let’s legitimise it by making “Sexual Services Act” the title. That is going along with the
very thing the member for Churchlands says she opposes! The member is proposing to legitimise this by
removing “prostitution” and “acts of prostitution” - words that say what they mean - from the title of the act.
The member is proposing instead to use euphemistic vernacular. This bill is using euphemistic vernacular; it is
making it sound okay and softening the blow. It is a bit like saying that a sex act service is no different from a
gardening service or a lawn mowing service. I believe there is a difference and I will oppose every instance
where a euphemism is used. I do not believe, and I cannot support, a euphemistic title - right from the
beginning. I will not support “Sex Services Act”, in the same way that I will oppose every other attempt to use
euphemistic vernacular to make this bill sound okay. It is not okay!
Later on we will talk about “managers”, “officers”, operators” and “small owner-operated businesses” as if it is
okay! It is not okay. I cannot support an amendment that removes the words “Prostitution Act” and replaces
them with “Sexual Services Act”. I will not support the removal of the word “prostitution” from any other part
of the bill, because that is what the bill is about and we should say that that is what it is about. To use
euphemisms lessens the blow and lessens the meaning and makes it sound okay to the community, allowing the
government to push its ideological agenda by getting through a bill that will legitimise prostitution. This bill is
not about sex services; it is about legitimising prostitution in Western Australia.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Mr Acting Speaker, we are debating the title of the act. A little later in the debate, I
will suggest that “individual sex worker” be removed from the bill and replaced with “prostitute”. I will do this
for the same reasons that the member for Churchlands has argued. If this is the prostitution reform bill, where
will we find mention of the prostitutes? After the front page, the word “prostitute” does not appear in the bill.
Consequently, the Attorney General has no option but to accept this amendment.
When the time comes, I will argue my point very strongly, because I totally disagree with the Attorney General.
He cannot, in a state with a population the size of that in Western Australia, with a little over two million people,
say to the rest of the world that, by-the-by, we are going to change the description of certain women. One of the
smallest Parliaments in the world is going to say that some women are no longer prostitutes; they are individual
sex workers. What a load of garbage!
Recently, a person came into my office and told me that he had made an application to open a brothel in
Northam. He was talking about prostitutes; he was not talking about individual sex workers. The blokes at the
Northam Worker’s Club are not going to talk about individual sex workers. They will talk about whores and
prostitutes and use a whole raft of other terms that the whole world uses in the description of people in this
industry. What audacity to come in here with the view that this tiny little state of Western Australia can change
the title of an activity that has been around for 10 000 years, plus. I think someone said in the last debate that
this is not the oldest profession in the world; it is the second or third oldest profession. Unlike some members
here, I have not been around that long!
Mr J.A. McGinty: You’re pushing hard now!
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I am pushing credibility, I know, so I will not labour the point. I am arguing this
seriously. I raised this seriously during the last week we debated this bill, and I will do it again. In October
1991, when the current Treasurer was the disability services minister, he brought into this chamber a raft of new
terms to describe Western Australians. Has any of those terms been taken up?
Dr E. Constable interjected.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: They are fantastic terms; for example, blind people were to be called “visually
impaired”! What did the Association for the Blind of Western Australia have to say about that? They blasted
the minister and said, “Our people are not visually impaired; they do not look awful; they are actually blind.” If
we play those silly games in the way that this bill is trying to play silly games with names, we will get absolutely
nowhere, and that is why this bill is a disgrace. I say to those sitting at the table that the people who put this bill
together have nothing to be proud of. The Attorney General, who introduced the bill, has nothing to be proud of.
As I said before, I am not opposing this bill because it is a prostitution bill, because of a moral position or
because of a religious position, but because it is terrible legislation. How dare anyone bring into this chamber
legislation containing terms such as “sex worker” and “individual sex worker”. What nonsense! We are meant
to be grown-up people. We are meant to be people who make decisions on behalf of Western Australians. Who
in Western Australia will say, “The two women working down the street are not prostitutes; they are actually
individual sex workers”? When local government debates the issues, and people object to the house operating
down the street, will they say that two individual sex workers are working in that house? They will say that
there is a prostitute or two working in that house and they are selling their services to the community. That is
what they should say because it is a worldwide term that everyone understands; namely, the description of a
woman who sells her body.
6136                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

The matter here is not really about prostitution. I argue that under the Attorney General’s bill the individual sex
worker is still a prostitute. In seeking to make it legal for people to work in brothels and to receive workers
compensation and all the rest, they will be called workers. When the time comes we need to debate that issue.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I want to pick up on a couple of comments previous members have made about these
amendments before the house. Quite frankly, this is a big con job by the Attorney General. He knows the
meaning of prostitution and about the degrading acts they must perform to be paid a certain amount of money
from their customers. Prostitution is a trade. When I was growing up, I always thought gay people were people
who were naturally happy. It was not until I was quite an elderly age that I learnt that the term “gay” people
referred to either lesbians or homosexuals. We do not use the term gay for people who are happy, which we did
when I was a boy. One would say, “He’s a gay person, isn’t he?” I never dreamt for one minute that the word
gay would one day be used to describe someone who was either a lesbian or a homosexual. That is an example
of the initial meaning of a word that had a very pleasant connotation changing in our dictionary to have a
different meaning. If members looked up “gay” in the dictionary now, I think they would find that it is defined
as either a man or a woman who has homosexual tendencies. Many different euphemisms have been used for
women and men who have a different sexual nature to the overwhelming majority of people in this world. In the
old days homosexual men were called queers, poofs and all sorts of things. Those terms do not appear
anywhere, yet they are probably used more than other terms. The Attorney General would not use those sorts of
words in his lesbian law reform bill because he did not like it. He wanted to give them more respectability.
Lesbians are often called dykes and all sorts of other names. I would not use those terms myself because they
are degrading and I do not believe in treating people that way. However, the Attorney General is doing a con job
on the people of Western Australia by using language to make respectable a degrading trade that has always
been called prostitution. As my colleague the member for Avon says, people who sell their bodies for all sorts of
activities - degrading sex, not just straightforward sex - are known as prostitutes. At the end of the day, people
know where they are. We cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. If a person is a prostitute, we should
retain that term all the way through this bill if we are to give any legitimacy and honesty to the legislation.
Every time the Attorney General wants to change the word “prostitute” to “sex worker”, like the member for
Avon and anyone else who so chooses, I will oppose such a move, because it is not an accurate description of the
meaning of this bill. A sex worker can be all sorts of things; it can be someone who helps someone with sexual
problems, as I have said before. The Attorney General is putting people who are doing what is a very
worthwhile job into the same category as people who want to sell their bodies for degrading sexual activities.
They are prostitutes and they will remain prostitutes, so the Liberal Party will oppose this amendment.
Although I can see the logic behind the member for Churchlands’ amendment, I think it is playing into the
Attorney General’s hands, and I do not think that is the member for Churchlands’ intention. She is usually a
stickler for ensuring legislation is written in the best way possible, and I commend her for that, but if we agree to
this change we will be playing into the Attorney General’s hands. I am sure he will be very happy to accept it,
but we will oppose it. However, I guarantee that if this bill is passed unamended and transmitted to the other
place, the Attorney General will have one of his colleagues in there change the description of the bill so that, at
the end of the day, “prostitution” and “prostitute” will not appear anywhere in the world as far as the Parliament
of Western Australia is concerned. I say to the Attorney General that he should hang his head in shame for even
bringing this bill into this house.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I ask that the Attorney General put this is bill on hold and send it to a committee. I
spoke to Giz Watson, who is a member of the Standing Committee on Legislation, about the trafficking issue,
and she said there was no trafficking in WA. During the course of this consideration in detail I will provide the
Attorney General with evidence of trafficking in WA. I have solid evidence that there is trafficking of women. I
am not sure whether there is trafficking of children. I know that there are caseworkers working with women
who have been brought to WA through trafficking. This is very much a women’s issue; although it is not just a
women’s issue. Women who have come into WA through trafficking are being abused, Attorney General. Why
are they being brought in through trafficking? Humantrafficking.org, a web source for combating human
trafficking, states -
         There are many causes of human trafficking to Australia. Project Respect argues that the demand for
         trafficked women in Australia is fueled by: 1) a lack of women in Australia prepared to do prostitution;
         2) ‘customer’ demand for women seen as compliant; 3) ‘customer’ demand for women who they can be
         violent towards; and 4) racialized ideas that Asian women have certain qualities, for example that they
         are more compliant and will accept higher levels of violence.
[Quorum formed.]
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The committee set up by the Attorney General looked at some of the issues to do with
prostitution. However, it did not look at the aspect of human trafficking. Another report from
humantrafficking.org states -
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6137

         •   At least 1,000 women are kept in debt-bonded prostitution in Australia, where they are raped,
             beaten and starved.
         •   The women, usually from Thailand and Burma, are brought into Australia by human traffickers
             who force them to work as prostitutes - often in legal brothels - for free until they pay off “debts”
             ...
             ...
         •   There are at least 1,000 adult women in Australia in any one year who have been brought here to
             work as prostitutes and most have their passports removed and are subjected to violence and rape.
When prostitution was legalised in Victoria, the number of both legal and illegal brothels grew. That meant that
the number of women being trafficked and abused also grew.
The report goes on to say -
         •   They are usually locked in the brothel or house with other trafficked women. This is often the
             period when the women experience the most violence. The sexual violence teaches them that they
             are there simply to satisfy customers and cannot refuse types of customers or any sexual act,
             including sex without condoms.
The Attorney General has said that this bill will address the occupational safety and health of prostitutes. What
about addressing what is happening to these trafficked women? The report goes on to say -
         •   Some victims report being shown pornographic images or videos and told that this is what they will
             be required to do.
         •   Rape, physical violence, starvation and threats of harm to the women’s families are all used to instil
             fear and punish those who resist or try to escape.
Another report by humantrafficking.org looks at sex slavery in Australia and states -
         . . . Australia’s sex slavery laws are failing and police are not doing enough to free enslaved women. A
         sex industry insider says traffickers are turning to Korean women after police cracked down on the
         importation of Thai sex slaves -
                                                     Quorum
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Mr Acting Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the house.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Dr S.C. Thomas): Order! The member cannot call for another quorum for
15 minutes.
                                                 Debate Resumed
The ACTING SPEAKER: Order! I remind the member for Alfred Cove, while we have this slight
interruption, that I have given her some leeway in this debate. However, the member has now moved to a very
general debate. The motion that we are debating refers specifically to the deletion of the words “Prostitution
Act” and the insertion of the words “Sexual Services Act”. I have given the member some leeway. However, I
ask the member to try to come back to the motion at hand.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. The member for Churchlands has suggested that we
delete the words “Prostitution Act” and insert the words “Sexual Services Act”. As I said earlier, we know that
with sexual services comes the trafficking of women. The report from humantrafficking.org goes on to state -
         It has been estimated 300 women are brought into Australia each year and up to 1,000 women currently
         work as sex slaves.
                                                  Point of Order
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Mr Acting Speaker, I raise the issue of relevance.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Dr S.C. Thomas): Order! I have given the member for Alfred Cove some leeway
to date. I am no longer able to do so. I ask the member to finish her comments on the proposed change of title
from “Prostitution Act” to “Sexual Services Act”, and to find another place in the bill to debate the point that she
is trying to make.
                                                 Debate Resumed
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Mr Acting Speaker, I am more than happy to come back repeatedly in the bill -
Mr J.A. McGinty: I don’t know that you will be allowed to! The Speaker might have something to say about
that.
                                                  Point of Order
Mr A.D. McRAE: Mr Acting Speaker -
6138                                 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Prostitution is trafficking.
The ACTING SPEAKER: Order! The member for Riverton.
Mr A.D. McRAE: Mr Acting Speaker, the member immediately went to canvass your advice and ruling to her
by saying, “I will do it repeatedly”, and by not acknowledging that you had given her a direction.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: On a further point of order -
The ACTING SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. The member was referring to another point. I
ask the member to return specifically to the debate.
                                                   Debate Resumed
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. I cannot support the deletion of the words
“Prostitution Act” and the insertion of the words “Sexual Services Act”. In fact, I cannot support anything that
the Attorney General wants to do in this bill. The Attorney General has got it all wrong. Hon Giz Watson, who
was a member of the committee that looked at this bill, has said to me that she did not realise that trafficking was
an issue in Western Australia. Had Hon Giz Watson realised that, I think the report of the committee would
have been different, and this bill would not be before this house. Many members of the community have asked
the Attorney General to address them tomorrow. I invite all the women in this house to go to the rally tomorrow
and listen to those women, who will be trying to encourage the Attorney General to take this bill off the table,
because of the damage that it will cause to the Western Australian community.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I would normally support the member for Churchlands on this amendment. However, in
my view, the words “Sexual Services Act” do not go far enough. I made my reasons for saying that clear when
we last debated this amendment. I had originally foreshadowed an amendment to change the title to the
“Commercial Sexual User Act”. Prostitution is a commercial service. If we wanted to change the title of the act
to something benign like the “Sexual Services Act”, it would be like the Child Care Services Act, the Court
Security and Custodial Services Act or the Disability Services Act. However, this bill is not like those acts. This
bill is about the provision of a commercial sexual service. In my view, the words “Sexual Services Act” do not
reflect the seriousness and the intent of this bill for women in Western Australia. My proposed amendment -
which will not get up, but which I believe will better reflect what is contained in this legislation - is to delete all
words after “by”, as the member for Churchlands is also proposing, and substitute the words “Decriminalisation
of Brothels and Living Off the Commercial Sexual Use and Abuse of Young People and Others pursuant to
s.190 and s.191 of the Criminal Code”. That is what this bill does. This bill is about the legalisation of brothels.
I believe the proposed title is too benign. I have been astounded at the attitude of Hon Giz Watson on some of
the issues that have been raised in this place. For Hon Giz Watson - who was on this committee, yet no Liberal
Party member was on this committee - to say that she did not know that there was trafficking in Western
Australia -
Dr J.M. Woollard interjected.
Ms S.E. WALKER: As the member for Alfred Cove has said, a police officer told her that there was no
trafficking in Western Australia, and she believed him. Surely with her research skills - I know she has some
research skills, because I have read a couple of her speeches - she should have been able to do more than that.
Hon Giz Watson has the power in the upper house to stop this bill from going through this Parliament. I call on
Hon Giz Watson again to stop this bill when it gets to the other house.
I will be abstaining from voting on this amendment, for two reasons. The first is that I believe the term “Sexual
Services Act” is benign and does not go far enough. The second is that I am not prepared to vote for the term
“Prostitution Act” either. I believe the title of the legislation should represent what this bill is all about. It is not
like the Child Care Services Act, the Disability Services Act or the Court Security and Custodial Services Act.
As far as I am concerned the proposed title of the act is doing a favour for the Attorney General. I will not do
any favours for this Attorney General and what he is doing to women in this state. The Attorney General is so
busy that he does not realise what he is doing here. He has let the member for Perth take control of this
legislation, probably as a factional favour. The member for Perth is not here and has not been here since he
made his comments.
Dr J.M. Woollard interjected.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The member for Alfred Cove has said that a large number of people have been trafficked
from Thailand.
Several members interjected.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Dr S.C. Thomas): Order!
Ms S.E. WALKER: The Attorney General has allowed the member for Perth to have carriage of this bill, and
has done so deliberately. Is he a factional mate of the Attorney General? The Attorney General has brought all
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                       6139

this social engineering into Parliament and yet has been regressive to women. The word to describe this
legislation is “regressive”. This is the most regressive piece of legislation that I have seen. The Attorney
General should be ashamed of himself. He should get rid of the health portfolio and manage this portfolio
properly.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: As I said earlier, I believe that the Attorney General has no option but to accept the
amendment of the member for Churchlands because the rest of the bill does not refer to prostitution. I am keen
to deal with that a little later on when we come to the description clauses. The Attorney General is seeking with
this bill to make a commercial brothel a legitimate enterprise. Therefore, the member for Churchlands has a
point in her description of what the title should be. The Attorney General has two options when describing this
bill. I suggest that under his scenario he cannot use the word “prostitution”, because the rest of the bill argues
that there is no such creature as a prostitute. It is therefore illogical to have the front page of the bill refer to
prostitution reform. The title has been changed. What is the new title?
Mr J.A. McGinty: It was the Prostitution Act. We are proposing that it be changed to the Prostitution Reform
Act and the member for Churchlands has proposed it should be changed to the Sexual Services Act.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I again go back to the Treasurer’s activities in 1991. I have talked about this a lot
because I think it was one of the most entertaining days in this chamber. He said that deaf people would no
longer be deaf; they would be hearing impaired. The chief executive of the WA Deaf Society at the time went
berserk, saying that its members were deaf, not 100 per cent hearing impaired. One deaf teacher said that she
had been deaf since birth and was proud to be deaf. The then Minister for Disability Services, I would say with
all good intent, came into this place in 1991 to change a whole raft of terms. Has one term changed from 1991
until now? No, not one has changed. This whole bill is a nonsense. The Attorney General has the opportunity
now to improve the bill. I believe that I know where the member for Churchlands is coming from. As the
member for Hillarys said, the member for Churchlands would like a better description of the bill. I am not so
kind about this bill because it is one of the worst bills that I have seen come into this house in 21 years. I will be
opposing every word of this bill and doing everything in my power to let Western Australia know that I will do
my level best to stop this horrible piece of legislation coming into being, because it is poor legislation and not
because of the process.
We need to talk about the title of the legislation. A title of legislation should describe its content. The content of
this bill takes out the word “prostitute” and replaces it with “individual sex worker”. I would be very interested
if I finally got to Europe, where I have not been for 10 years, and walked through some of the red light districts
to see “individual sex worker” on the windows. It would be a really interesting day if I got there and read that,
but it is not going to happen. For any sensible carriage of this bill, the Attorney General needs to change the title
because it is not a prostitution reform bill. The Attorney General is getting rid of prostitution and making
running a brothel a legal business in Western Australia. We all received the communication from Germany that
indicated what might happen here. If brothels become legitimate businesses in this town, they will be treated
legitimately in every way. If a person working in a brothel in my town is a sex worker, why is this bill called the
prostitution reform bill? It does not make any sense.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I cannot support legislation with the title of “Sexual Services Act”.
[Quorum formed.]
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The Attorney General has brought this bill into the house to legalise prostitution and
brothels, just as they are legalised in the eastern states. Again, quoting from the June 2004 inquiry into the
trafficking of women for sexual servitude, it refers to the entry point for Australia being Sydney. The traffickers
then farm the women out to brothels.
                                                   Point of Order
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I raise again the same point of order of relevance. I think the member for Alfred Cove is
verging on contempt in the way she is addressing the issue.
The ACTING SPEAKER: The member for Alfred Cove will have to try to concentrate her address on the
name of the act. I will give her a little longer to come to that point directly, but she will have to address the
motion before us, which is the insertion of the words “Sexual Services Act”.
                                                  Debate Resumed
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. I cannot support the amendment that the title be the
Sexual Services Act because, as it says in the report, the women who are brought into the country are farmed out
to brothels in Melbourne, Perth and various areas. By changing the title to the Sexual Services Act, we are
accepting the findings of this federal report, which are that people are brought into the country and put into legal
and illegal brothels, where they are sent from one state to another. I again ask the Attorney General to leave this
bill on the table, because I believe the whole issue should go to a committee that will look at all the issues. It
6140                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

should not just say that it will look at what is being done in New Zealand and adopt that model but look at all the
issues, including the women’s issues.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I accuse this government of rank hypocrisy with this bill. The Attorney General has
brought in this legislation to amend the Prostitution Act to make it the Sexual Services Act. The point that the
member for Alfred Cove, the Liberal Party and I make is that this debate is about the abuse of women. I refer to
a question asked of the Attorney General by the member for Churchlands in 2006 about women and violence.
The member for Churchlands asked the Attorney General whether there were any training strategies in place to
prevent workplace aggression and violence against nurses. The Attorney General boasted about the strategies in
place to deal with violence and aggression towards nurses and yet he does not mind bringing in a bill to legalise
brothels, the result of which will be violence and aggression towards women. Does the Attorney General get my
point? When we debated the Dangerous Sexual Offenders Bill, the Attorney General talked about the violence
perpetrated against women by Mr Narkle. The Attorney General is great at going out into the community and
talking about violence against women. However, the Attorney General has introduced this bill knowing - unless
he is turning a blind eye, the Attorney General must know, because he is a man of the world - that there is
violence and aggression towards women in brothels. In his response to a question asked by the member for
Churchlands about nurses who were the victims of violence and aggression, the Attorney General said that
nurses would be looked after. What about the women who work in brothels? I do not agree with the title of the
act being the “Sexual Services Act”. That title does not reflect what the bill is doing. The Attorney General is
regressing the situation for Western Australian women, particularly young women. In response to the question
asked by the member for Churchlands, the Attorney General boasted that over $750 000 had been allocated to
each of the area health services for training and the minimisation of workplace aggression and violence in the
2005-06 financial year. He said that each area health service had employed a variety of trainers and workplace
aggression and violence strategies based on individual area health service requirements. The suggested title
“Sexual Services Act” is benign. It does not reflect what is happening with this legislation. The bill will
decriminalise brothels and the living off the earnings of people for commercial sexual use and abuse. I am
talking about young people and others. It will also decriminalise sections 190 and 191 of the Criminal Code.
The member for Churchlands asked how many nurses had undertaken workplace aggression and violence
training and from what hospitals. A few years ago - it has happened since - some nurses were the victims of
violence. The Attorney General replied that a total of 3 597 nurses had undertaken training in the prevention of
workplace aggression and violence. That is why I will be abstaining from the vote on this bill. I do not agree
with the Prostitution Act. I do not understand the government’s tactics. I know that parliamentary counsel are
highly skilled. However, that they forgot to change the title of the Prostitution Act and for the Attorney General
to accept “Sexual Services Act” as the title is rank hypocrisy. This bill will regress the status of women in this
state. I will be abstaining from voting on behalf of my electorate to make a point.
Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN: I understand where the member for Churchlands is coming from with her
amendment. If my aim were to end up with a neat and tidy piece of legislation that, technically, was drafted as
well as possible, I would agree with her amendment. However, that is not my objective. My objective is similar
to the objective of the member for Avon - namely, at every stage of this debate I will oppose what the Labor
Party is attempting to do in this legislation. My train of thought is very simple. I would rather that the word
“prostitution” was used throughout the bill; therefore, I will support every one of the member for Avon’s
amendments. If, as undoubtedly will be the case, those amendments were not passed, but it was possible to leave
one mention of the word “prostitution”, by God I would support that. A couple of members have alluded to the
fact that the word “prostitution” is used 91 times in the act. The word “prostitute” is used 45 times. When the
Attorney General responds, I would like him to answer some simple questions. When the act ultimately is
proclaimed - assuming the Attorney General gets all the changes he wants, including the change to the title - how
many times will the words “prostitution” and “prostitute” appear in the act? It is my understanding that those
words will not be used in the act.
Mr J.A. McGinty: That is right.
Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN: If the government gets its way, the words “prostitution” and “prostitute” will
not end up in the finished product. For all intents, it looks as though the government will get its way. That leads
to the obvious point that has been raised a number of times. If the word “prostitution” is not used in the
legislation, the title can be changed. However, I work the other way around. There is no legal requirement or
technical or practical purpose for changing this terminology, except for the one that members, such as the
member for Hillarys, have pointed to; that is, to normalise prostitution. When we change a title, we do it quite
deliberately. There is only one reason to do that in the case of this bill; that is, to give a more positive
connotation to what is a very negative, nasty and evil act. The member for Hillarys referred, in a sensitive way,
to how that happened to people with homosexual orientations. I have spoken to a number of homosexuals who
have said that over the years they have been able to quite deliberately ensure that people do not refer to them in
negative terms or do not refer to them as “homosexual” or “lesbian”. People in the community have picked up
on the term “gay”. Frankly, I do not mind the use of that term. However, I would have preferred another word
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                         6141

to have been picked, because, as the member for Hillarys has pointed out, even though the word “gay” has a lot
of definitions, people tend not to use it at all.
Mr R.F. Johnson: We actively avoid it.
Mr D.F. BARRON-SULLIVAN: No member wishes to see discrimination against people on the basis of their
sexual preferences. Let us use another term rather than some of the more derogatory terms that have been used
in the past. Changing terminology and getting the community more used to using a particular term is genuinely
beneficial. In this case, there is no benefit in changing the name - none at all. The Attorney General has
answered my question. He will not allow the word “prostitution” or “prostitute” to be used in this legislation. I
am not the only member who believes that that is clearly a first step in the process of normalising the trade of
prostitution.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The member for Leschenault is quite right. I do not usually agree with him, and nor do a
lot of other people. However, the member for Leschenault is right about the softening of the title of this
legislation. Changing the title of this legislation from Prostitution Act to Sexual Services Act will make it
benign and softer. It will play into the hands of the pimps and those who run brothels. I refer to a book entitled
Making Sex Work: A failed experiment with legalised prostitution by Mary Lucille Sullivan. Page 172 refers to
the Sexpo website and the trade show and reads -
         Its organisers work hard to persuade the pubic that Sexpo offers frank and accurate information on all
         aspects of ‘health, adult entertainment, sexuality and adult lifestyles’ . . .
         Language is pivotal in constructing this mythology.
         Promotional material seldom refers to the ‘prostitution industry’, but to ‘adult’ products and services.
This softening of the title to “Sexual Services Act” to make it benign is wrong, and it is playing into the hands of
brothel owners and the people who have brought this legislation into this Parliament and made it regressive for
women. That is why I will abstain from voting on this. I do not agree with the Prostitution Act. As I said when
we last debated this issue in consideration in detail, we have thrown out “prostitution”, but we still are not calling
the person who actually has or pays for the sexual service a sex worker user; we are calling that person the client,
and everyone in this chamber thinks that is okay; nobody picks it up. I think legislation is not scrutinised enough
in this Legislative Assembly, and everyone feels a bit uncomfortable with this topic. I do not. The fact is that
this is just another issue to be looked at and dealt with. Frankly, I will not agree to anything that will
accommodate the Attorney General’s bill by softening the words. He has brought in legislation that is regressive
for women in this state.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The member for Nedlands wants to call it the “Sexual Services Act”.
Ms S.E. Walker: No, I don’t.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I am sorry, it is not the member for Nedlands. The member for Churchlands wants to
call it the “Sexual Services Act”. I think she is missing something very major in that title if she wants to use the
words “Sexual Services”. Maybe it should be the “Sexual Services and Trafficking of Women Act”, because
that is what will happen. There will be increased trafficking of women who come into Australia via Sydney and
are then shipped over to Perth for sexual services. What impact will it have on women? Again, the
parliamentary joint committee stated -
         •    psychological and physical ill health due to violence while in the sex trafficking situation,
              including rape; beatings; forced abortions; threats and actual violence against family, including
              children in home countries; having their passport taken by traffickers; verbal abuse; and
              imprisonment.
It just happens that this proposed title, “Sexual Services Act”, really does not go into what will happen as a result
of this bill. As a result of this bill, we will have in Western Australia, similar to the eastern states, legal brothels
and illegal brothels, and women from other countries will be trafficked into those brothels and shipped around
Australia. That is why I think the member for Churchlands should look at including the words “and Trafficking
of Women”. Again, the parliamentary report states -
         The slave-like conditions that trafficked women in Australia are held in have been documented in the
         2000 court case against trafficker Gary Glazner in Victoria;
I wonder how the women on the other side in the Labor Party have allowed this bill to come into this house and
have supported this legislation. It will do so much harm. The women on the other side talk about women’s
rights, and the Attorney General wants to bring in a bill of rights. What about the rights of the women who are
currently being abused in these brothels as prostitutes, and what about the 300-odd women who will be
trafficked into Australia each year and who will also be abused? The parliamentary joint committee report states
that their abuse will actually be worse than the abuse that some of our prostitutes are subject to. I do not think it
6142                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

is acceptable to call this legislation the “Sexual Services Act” because it does not get to what will happen. It
does not deal with the issues. Again, the report states -
         Ms Gallagher offers several other characteristics of the trade:
We are talking about the trade - the “Sexual Services Act” and the trafficking trade. It states also -
         •   By definition, a trafficked person ends up in a situation from which she or he cannot escape.
             Traffickers and their accomplices use a variety of methods to prevent escape including threats and
             use of force, intimidation, detention and withholding of personal documents.
This bill does not look at the women’s issues. I do not know where the female members of this house,
particularly the female government members, are coming from. They talk about women’s rights. I am sure that
in their campaigns they ran on women’s rights. However, there is nothing in this bill that looks after women’s
rights. That is why I do not think we can have just “Sexual Services Act”; it must be “Sexual Services and
Trafficking of Women Act”, because we know from what has happened in the eastern states that that is what will
happen.
Mr J.N. Hyde: You’re making that up.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: No. We already have evidence that it is happening in Western Australia; and not only
is it happening in WA now, but also it will get worse.
Mr J.N. Hyde: Tedious repetition!
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The member for Perth could not care less about what happens to women.
Mr J.N. Hyde: Tedious repetition; no logic. Come on, let’s debate the actual clause. You don’t have any
arguments.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The member for Perth must live in cloud-cuckoo-land, because he says that is not
going to happen. We know there will be an increase in trafficking if this bill goes through.
Mr J.N. Hyde: Come on; shut her down.
                                                  Point of Order
Ms S.E. WALKER: The member for Perth said, “Shut her down.” He was referring to the member for Alfred
Cove, and she is entitled to be referred to as the member for Alfred Cove.
Mr J.N. Hyde: She’s gone eight seconds past the time.
Ms S.E. WALKER: That is a point of order.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Dr S.C. Thomas): There is no point of order.
                                                 Debate Resumed
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: At least there are a couple of Australian Labor Party members in the chamber.
Because I will have to be in this chamber for days on this bill, one of the things that I will do is make sure that
members opposite are in this chamber also. At least the member for Perth has come in to try to defend a dreadful
bill that is before this house. This is one of the worst constructed and thought-out bills that I have seen in this
place in 21 years.
Mr J.N. Hyde: You say that about every bill we bring in.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I am very happy to give the member for Perth the time to go back through Hansard
to verify his statement. Will the member for Perth tell me the last bill about which I said that?
Mr J.N. Hyde: The last week we were here you said it. I pointed it out to you then as well.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I point out to the member for Perth that that was the Prostitution Amendment Bill.
Before the Prostitution Amendment Bill, will the member for Perth tell me which bill I made those comments
about?
Mr J.N. Hyde: There are too many.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Which one?
Mr J.N. Hyde: You have to talk on the clause.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: No. The member asked me a question. He has to justify his position. This is his
government’s bill, not my bill. He put a position to me. He should justify his position.
Mr J.N. Hyde: I will at another time. This is too important a bill -
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: No; now! Do it now! The member can go and get his laptop and find the last time
that I said about any other bill that it is the worst bill that has come into the house.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                        6143

Mr J.N. Hyde: Tedious repetition, Mr Acting Speaker.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: No. I am responding to an interjection, Mr Acting Speaker. This is a legitimate
response to an interjection. The member for Perth said that every time a bill comes into this house, I say that it is
the worst bill I have seen. I challenge the member for Perth to come up with the proof that that is the case. He
should tell me the last time I said to this house that this is the worst bill that I have seen in 21 years.
Mr J.N. Hyde: You don’t have any comments on this bill, so you’re trying to go off on tangents.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I am calling the member for Perth to order.
Mr J.N. Hyde: You’re not the Speaker!
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: This bill is very much the member’s bill.
Mr J.N. Hyde: It’s not.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: It is very much his bill. The member for Perth asked a question of the member for
Alfred Cove, and he said, “Are you from the loony left?” What is the point of that remark? If the member for
Perth wants to come into this place and say that my contribution to this debate is of no value because I say the
same thing on every bill, he should come up with the proof.
Mr J.N. Hyde: It’s two minutes and forty seconds and you haven’t touched on the bill yet.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: No; come up with the proof! The member for Perth is the one who challenged me.
I said nothing about this issue. The member for Perth brought this issue forward. The member for Perth should
demonstrate some proof that what he is saying is true.
Mr J.N. Hyde: Three minutes and no relevance. Come on, member.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: The member for Perth needs to demonstrate in some way that what he is saying is
true. This will be a difficult debate; it will last for several days at least. If the member for Perth, who is the part
author of this bill, wants to accuse me of those sorts of things, I will challenge him to come up with the facts
each time. He will not be able to do that. The member for Perth has time to check his facts. A dinner
adjournment is coming up in an hour. He should search his laptop and come back after dinner, when I will
challenge him to come up with proof of his statement.
The ACTING SPEAKER: Member for Avon, the member is not responding at last, so I ask you to move
forward and redirect your remarks.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I am in a somewhat delicate position. As I have said, I am totally opposed to this
bill. I do agree with the amendment moved by the member for Churchlands, and that the title she has suggested
for the bill is a more appropriate title than the current title. I have heard the arguments. I oppose this bill
outright. I say to the minister that if this legislation was called the “Sexual Services Act”, at least it would
describe those people who will be working in brothels. I will debate that at another time. It does not describe
those people who are working in houses in the suburbs. At least the bill will attempt to describe the new
situations where running, owning and operating a brothel is a correct and lawful enterprise, which I totally
disagree with. When we come to the end of the debate, I will be voting against this bill. It just might mean that I
will be supporting the member for Churchlands.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Mr Acting Speaker, I can see -
Mr C.J. Barnett: See how upset he is!
Mr J.A. McGinty: He might be able to see but he can’t stand up!
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Absolutely. As I said, I can see the logic of the amendment moved by the member for
Churchlands. As my colleague the member for Avon has said, it is based on the fact that the rest of the bill will
not mention the words “prostitute” or “prostitution” at all. We all know why. It is because the Attorney General
is trying to make it sound like a nice airy-fairy industry that does not cause any harm, an industry where nobody
gets hurt and the workers are looked after. The Attorney General has said all along that regulating and
controlling this particular trade is the answer. It is not the answer. It will not be regulated very much at all,
because experience in other jurisdictions shows quite clearly that regulation and control does not work where
there are legalised brothels and activities associated with brothels. I am saying that there will be a massive
proliferation in this particular trade. Because I agree with the member for Avon and I will not agree to any
change of term from “prostitute” and “prostitution” to “sex worker” or “sexual activities worker” throughout the
bill, I cannot support this amendment. I cannot support this amendment and then oppose every other part of the
bill, which clearly says -
Mr J.N. Hyde: He’s a man of principle.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I cannot support it, because it is a matter of principle. The member for Perth has
interjected once again; he cannot help himself. I ask the Attorney General how much influence the member for
6144                              [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Perth has had in this bill. I know he was an integral member of his task force. Did he come up with the terms
“sex worker” and “sexual activities worker” as opposed to “prostitute”? I understand that the member for Perth
has had numerous conversations, meetings and communications with Mary-Anne Kenworthy, who owns a
brothel in his area. How much influence has she had through him on the Attorney General’s legislation?
Mr J.N. Hyde: She put up the Liberal candidate against us in Kalgoorlie. She’s on your side.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Am I right in saying that the member for Perth has had numerous meetings and
conversations with her?
Mr J.N. Hyde: With whom?
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Mary-Anne Kenworthy.
Mr J.N. Hyde: I haven’t seen her for five years.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Has the member for Perth not seen or spoken to her?
Mr J.N. Hyde: Not since the member for Darling Range put me on the Liberal Party committee and we had to
consult with her under your government.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: So the member for Perth has not seen or spoken with her since then?
Mr J.N. Hyde: She is a supporter of the Liberal Party.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Has the member for Perth not seen or spoken with her since then?
Mr J.N. Hyde: I don’t think I’ve spoken to her for the past three years.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: So the member for Perth is telling this house - he should be careful what he says; he must
not mislead this house - that he has not had meetings, conversations or communications with Mary-Anne
Kenworthy for at least three years? Is that what he is saying?
Mr J.N. Hyde: Not to the best of my knowledge.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Did the member for Perth not consult with her when he was part of this important task
force that was hand-picked by the Attorney General? He was one of the chosen few. I wonder why. I am told
that the member for Perth has interests in Thailand and he goes there quite regularly. We know that there are
massive prostitution problems in Thailand.
Mr J.N. Hyde: No, there’s not.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Yes, there is.
Mr J.N. Hyde: There’s more prostitution in Australia. Again, you people have no idea.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I would assume, being a regular to visitor to Thailand, that the member for Perth would
have seen the way that those people are treated in that trade. Yet he wants to bring that sort of trade here and
legalise it.
Mr J.N. Hyde: You haven’t read this bill.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have read the member for Perth’s stuff ad nauseam.
Mr J.N. Hyde: You’re anti-women.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: What a lot of rubbish! I am standing up for women. Prostitution is a degrading act
against women, and the women members of the Labor Party should be ashamed of themselves. They are letting
their fellow women in Western Australia down by supporting this bill. We all know what sort of moral
standings the member for Perth has. He does not have to go on any further. We love it when he interjects
because he opens up all sorts of avenues for us.
                                                   Point of Order
Mrs J. HUGHES: I rise on a point of order. I believe that the member is making assumptions about the
member’s morals. I believe that perhaps it is not suitable for members of this house to make assumptions.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Further to that point of order, I merely said that we all know what sort of moral standings
the member for Perth has. I did not say what those moral standings were. I could have, and then I would have
been at fault.
The ACTING SPEAKER: Member, there is no point of order. I warn the member for Hillarys that he is
sailing close to the wind if he starts to impugn a fellow member. Would the member like to continue for his
remaining 12 seconds?
                                                Debate Resumed
Mr J.A. McGinty: I think you had almost finished.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                       6145

Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I had almost finished. I cannot resist it when the member for Perth starts interjecting and
saying things that I do not think are necessarily true, but they will come out in the fullness of time.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I believe that instead of calling this legislation the “Sexual Services Act”, the member
for Churchlands should be looking at calling it the “Sexual Services and Trafficking of Women Act”. I would
like to quote from an interview with the Rescue Foundation about liberating sex slaves in India. It states -
         UNICEF estimates that 1.2 million children are trafficked across international borders each year. Most
         of these are trafficked for the purposes of prostitution. According to Save the Children India, clients
         now prefer 10- to 12-year-old girls. The soaring number of prostitutes believed to have contracted HIV
         in India’s brothels has helped give India the second-largest number of people living with HIV/AIDS in
         the world,
If the member for Churchlands is going to support the Attorney General with this bill, she needs to look carefully
at including the trafficking issue, because this bill is not just about sexual services. We know that there will be
an increase in trafficking. When I referred to the federal report earlier, I pointed out that people are coming into
Sydney and then being transported to other states. An article by Lily Hyde states -
         Trafficking of people does not just mean transport; it also implies ownership. The UN defines
         trafficking as ‘the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of
         the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion . . . for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation
         shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of prostitution or other forms of sexual exploitation,
The member for Churchlands needs to put sexual services and trafficking into the title of the act. There will be
an increase in trafficking. The bill basically says that Western Australia is saying it is okay to traffic children
and women in the eastern states. We will become part of that circuit. When people in the eastern states get
bored with the people who have been trafficked, maybe in Queensland, they will be moved down to New South
Wales and then to Victoria. Then they will be shipped over to WA.
They are exploited - it is mainly women who are being exploited. This is very much a women’s rights issue and
that is why I just cannot accept that the female members of the Labor Party have allowed the Attorney General to
put this bill on the table. I ask them to vigorously lobby the Attorney General to take this bill off the table and to
send the bill to a committee that comprises 80 per cent women to look at this issue and to look at women’s rights
and to look at trafficking and to look at what is happening. The committee should try to give some protection
and ensure that by our legalising brothels - we know there will be legal and illegal brothels, the same as there are
in Victoria - we are protecting the people who are being trafficked. I have referred earlier to statistics given by
the police about people who have been trafficked into Western Australia. I know there are case workers who are
dealing with women who have already been trafficked here. It is contained in federal reports that have looked at
this. We should not be bringing a bill into this house that will make that worse and that will allow the industry to
grow. It is an industry in which women are exploited; in which children are exploited. They are not just
exploited in a minor way. They are exploited in terrible ways.
I do not think the member for Churchlands should change the title to the “Sexual Services Act.” I will not
support the change in the title because I will not support the bill. She should consider the women’s rights issue.
If she wants it to be called the “Sexual Services Act”, it should be called the “Sexual Services and Trafficking of
Women Act”. If this bill is passed by the government in this house and with the support of the Greens in the
upper house, that is what will happen. There are already women who have been trafficked into Western
Australia. If this bill is passed, more women will be trafficked. The Attorney General needs to send this bill to a
predominantly female committee so that these issues can be looked at seriously and something can come back to
this house that stops the exploitation and trafficking of women.
Dr G.G. JACOBS: I have already stated that I cannot support the title being amended to the “Sexual Services
Act” for all the reasons that have already been put tonight. It indicates how ill-prepared this bill has been. It is a
very difficult issue. Member for Churchlands, if the title is changed to the “Sexual Services Act”, how can we
then resist the euphemistic vernacular that is used throughout the bill to take the term “prostitution” out of it?
Dr E. Constable: I do not agree with it; I have said that.
Dr G.G. JACOBS: The member is compromised in her opposition to using vernacular euphemisms throughout
the bill. The member for Leschenault has already said that the term “prostitution” is mentioned 91 times in the
act, but this bill will take out those references. As such, the member will not be able to mount an argument about
softening the bill so that prostitution is no different from a gardening service or a lawnmowing service; it is just a
service. The bill legitimises it. The title legitimises prostitution in Western Australia.
There is another point that goes to show how ill-prepared this bill is that is being presented to us: we have been
dealing just with the proposed change to the title of the act. I believe that the origins of this bill come from the
“Prostitution Law Reform for Western Australia” report, which was presented in January 2007. The approach of
the working group is stated in black and white in the report. It focused largely on a minimalist decriminalisation
6146                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

model. That was right from the start. The member for Perth was on the working group. There was very much a
predetermined conclusion: if we want an answer, we choose the people who believe in a minimalist
decriminalisation model. That is not a balanced approach in investigating this issue and presenting balanced
legislation.
                                                  Point of Order
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I refer to standing order 94, which requires that debate be relevant to the matter before the
chair. The points being made by the member mean he is now going away from the title of the act and into the
general policy that underpins it. He is referring to the report of the working group. It is appropriate that the
member be requested to address the question currently before the chair.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr G. Woodhams): I take the point of order. Given the state of the debate at the
moment, I ask the member to reflect the comments he is making at a later stage of the debate and return to the
point of this amendment.
                                                 Debate Resumed
Dr G.G. JACOBS: The point I was wishing to make is that this legislation is ill-prepared, so much so that we
are stuck on the issue -
Mr J.A. McGinty: You have just been told by the Acting Speaker to address the amendment.
Dr G.G. JACOBS: - of the title.
Mr J.A. McGinty: That is a long bow.
Dr G.G. JACOBS: It is so much so that we are having a debate about the title. My point is that this is so ill-
prepared that we have spent an hour and a half to two hours, and all the hours previous to this, in debate, but we
are still dealing with the proposed amendment to the title of the act. With all the Attorney General’s advisers,
and all the work that has been done, we have been having a debate right from the start about the proposed title. I
suggest to the Attorney General that the bill has been presented in an ill-prepared way, because the working
group which the Attorney General was advised by, and which was the origin of this bill, had a predetermined
and - please excuse the expression - preconceived idea about how this should go. That is why we have this bill -
however prepared - presented to the Parliament. I will oppose the proposed amendment to the title of the act.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I feel the need to defend myself a bit.
[Quorum formed.]
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: To some degree this debate is about on which chair one is sitting on the Titanic. I
gently point out to the member for Roe that there is another way of looking at this amendment. If we clearly
define that this bill is about sexual services, we can nail home to the Attorney General and the Australian Labor
Party exactly what this bill does. That is my argument. I am as opposed to this bill as is the member for Roe.
However, changing the title of the legislation to “Sexual Services Act” does not alter the fact that we are still
talking about a bill that will legalise brothels in Western Australia, and all the connotations that go with that.
Ms S.E. Walker interjected.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Yes. I will not argue against members who have put that point of view.
Mr R.F. Johnson: Prostitutes will be working in pairs rather than singularly.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: That is closer to my point. I am not opposed to the amendment moved by the
member for Churchlands, because it more closely describes that the bill will do what the member for Alfred
Cove is pointing out. In doing that it makes it easier to pick it off, not more difficult. Under the amended title of
the act, those people who operate in a brothel will be called sex workers, but the vast majority of people involved
in the industry will be in a house operated by two people and they will be called prostitutes, as they have always
been. Perhaps there is a connotation and an argument that I do not agree with; namely, that a prostitute is not a
person who is entitled to workers’ compensation, holiday leave etc. Under German regulations, an unemployed
person cannot knock back working as a prostitute, because prostitution is considered by German society to be a
legitimate job. Perhaps that is where we are heading, and if that is where we are going I am absolutely appalled.
I want to tell the people of Western Australia as loudly as I can that that is bad.
I am saying that there are two ways of looking at the title of the act. If we change the title to “Sexual Services
Act”, it will more clearly define a small section of the act and will allow us to pin that on the Attorney General.
I do not think it is right to throw a few brickbats at the member for Churchlands. The point is that we are
seeking to pass a bill that changes a modus operandi that has been in place in Western Australia ever since 1829
or 1827. Where is the member for Albany? Was Albany established in 1826, member for Roe?
Dr G.G. Jacobs: 1829.
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6147

Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Prostitution was established first in Albany, not Perth. The first white settlement in
Western Australia was in Albany, and I think it was in 1826, but I will not argue the point. Since that time, the
present system has been operating. The minister has introduced into this place a bill that seeks to change the
process. A significant part of that change is to legalise brothels and allow people to operate in those brothels as
sexual workers and receive workers’ compensation and holiday pay and - God forbid Labor wins the federal
election - be on an award. I say to the member for Alfred Cove that that is a probability. Once that becomes the
case, how could people accept unemployment benefits if they are offered jobs in an establishment? They are
interesting questions for the future.
It is important that we get the title of this act relatively right. I support the amendment moved by the member for
Churchlands. I might be a lonely little person in support of the member for Churchlands; nevertheless, it is
important to define what we are debating. We are debating a significant change that will be totally unacceptable
to the majority of Western Australians.
Ms S.E. WALKER: As much as it pains me, I cannot agree with the member for Avon, and that could affect
our future relationship!
Several members interjected.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I am thinking financially! I am jesting with the member for Avon, but this is a serious
topic. I cannot agree with the member for Avon because he says - I suppose he is right in some respects - that
the proposed amendment to change the title of the act to “Sexual Services Act” reflects the objective of the
legislation. I can agree with one word - “sexual” - but that is it.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: Is this a separation?
Ms S.E. WALKER: Not quite - a trial separation!
Clause 5 amends the Prostitution Act 2000. That is what the bill is all about. Suddenly, a prostitute becomes a
sex worker. Proposed subsection (2) states in part -
         “act as a sex worker” means to take part, as a sex worker, in a commercial sexual act;
The Childcare Services Act is about childcare services. Disability services is about disability services. This is
about a commercial sexual act. I suppose I can agree with the member for Churchlands and the member for
Avon on that, and that is reflected in the Prostitution Act 2000, but “Sexual Services Act” does not reflect what
this bill is about in any shape or form, and that is why I will abstain from voting on this amendment. I do not
believe that the legislation should retain the word “prostitution”.
The member for Alfred Cove was right when she pointed out that this is an Attorney General who wants to
introduce a bill of rights. What a joke! This bill is discriminatory. What about the Attorney General’s role in
relation to one of his responsibilities, the Equal Opportunity Commission? What about the fact that the women -
who will be abused - will be called sex workers, but the people who will abuse them will be called clients? Why
do we not change the domestic violence courts and get magistrates to say, “Could the client come forward?”
rather than calling the person the accused? That demonstrates the ridiculousness of this legislation. It is so
regressive that we just cannot see it. It reflects an attitude to women, and it is wrong. Not only women are
prostitutes. Based on the work I did in my former role as a prosecutor, I know there are young men who can get
caught up in paedophile rings. When they go into a paedophile ring, they are thrown around the room and they
get urinated on. They are videoed and photographed in the most appalling situations and they are physically
abused. Some of them are immature boys who go with physically mature men. I think the Attorney General has
an opportunity with this legislation, but the Attorney General has gone back to the Dark Ages. How can he
come in here and talk about equal opportunity and about a bill of rights when, in this bill, he is retaining the
word “client” while making the prostitute a sex worker. Even sex worker sounds terrible.
I will not support changing the title to “Sexual Services Act”, because it does not reflect what this bill is about.
The bill is about the decriminalisation of brothels in this state and about people living off the commercial sexual
use of young women’s and men’s bodies. I will not support it. That is why I must speak against the member for
Avon’s proposal.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I have suggested to the member for Churchlands that she call this legislation the
“Sexual Services and Trafficking Act”, or the “Sexual Services and Exploitation Act”. In fact, I think the title
should be the “Sexual Services and Exploitation Act”. The Australian Centre for the Study of Sexual Assault, in
its report on the trafficking of women for sexual exploitation, has said -
                                                 Points of Order
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Mr Acting Speaker, I draw your attention to standing orders 94 and 97. Standing order
94 deals with relevance. Standing order 97 deals with repetitious or irrelevant debate. If I have been counting
correctly - I may have missed some - the member for Alfred Cove has risen at least six times during the course
6148                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

of this debate on the motion moved by the member for Churchlands to change the title of the legislation to
“Sexual Services Act”. On each occasion, the member for Alfred Cove has introduced an issue - that is,
trafficking - that is not part of the question that is currently before the house. The member for Alfred Cove has
now raised this same issue on at least six occasions. Therefore, in my submission, the member for Alfred Cove
is being both repetitious and irrelevant. I think this is part of a broader strategy to make sure that the substance
of this bill is not debated. I therefore ask you, Mr Acting Speaker, to take the appropriate action under standing
order 97 and give a direction to the member.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Further to that point of order, what the Attorney General has just said can be equally
applied to the member for Avon. It can also be equally applied to me.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I have not said the same thing twice, and I do not believe the member for Alfred Cove has
either. This point of order actually reflects the Attorney General’s attitude to women, which is also reflected in
this bill. Why did the Attorney General not raise this point of order when the member for Avon was on his feet?
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr G. Woodhams): Order! That is not a point of order, member for Nedlands.
With respect to the point of order raised by the Attorney General, I direct the member for Alfred Cove to make
her points relevant to this particular proposed amendment. I believe that many members in this house would like
to progress the debate on this amendment. I therefore ask the member for Alfred Cove to be direct and to the
point with that.
                                                 Debate Resumed
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. In fact, I was not repeating myself, as the Attorney
General has said, because previously I had been arguing with the member for Churchlands that the title of this
legislation should be the “Sexual Services and Trafficking Act”. I am now suggesting to the member for
Churchlands that she might want to call this bill the “Sexual Services and Exploitation Act”. The United
Nations’ report suggests that 80 per cent of the victims that are trafficked across international borders are female,
and 70 per cent of those females are trafficked for sexual exploitation. That is why I am suggesting, Attorney
General -
                                                  Point of Order
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Point of order, Mr Acting Speaker.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr G. Woodhams): Order! Member for Alfred Cove, the Attorney General’s
point of order is, I think, repetition -
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
The ACTING SPEAKER: Certainly. If the member for Alfred Cove is being repetitious, she would know that.
Some of the members in this house might not know that. I have directed the member previously not to be
repetitious. The member has had opportunities in this house to put her case. In the remaining time, I would like
the member to continue to put her case, but to desist from being repetitious.
                                                 Debate Resumed
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Mr Acting Speaker, I am not being repetitious, because previously I have talked about
sexual trafficking. I am now saying that as well as being sexual trafficking, it is also sexual exploitation.
Mr J.A. McGinty: That is not the question before the house. What you are saying must be relevant to the
debate.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: If the Attorney General is saying I am being repetitious, perhaps he is accepting the
fact that it is trafficking, and it is also exploitation. Perhaps he is seeing that there is a similarity between the
two. Perhaps that is why he is objecting to what I am saying. To get back to the proposed title, as I mentioned
earlier when I was talking about human rights, people are not meant to be bought and sold. That is considered
by the United Nations to be a violation of a person’s basic rights to freedom, autonomy and human dignity. This
sexual services act will allow people to be bought and sold.
Mr A.D. McRae: How will this bill allow people to be bought and sold?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I will answer that interjection, because the member for Riverton was not in the house
earlier. I have presented evidence in this house today from federal reports that have shown that trafficking is
taking place in Western Australia. I have explained what is involved with that trafficking. The committee that
looked at this bill did not look at the issue of trafficking. When I discussed this matter with Hon Giz Watson,
she said that the committee had not looked at the issue of trafficking, because the police had said it was not
happening. I have given the house statistics from case workers in Western Australia that show that sexual
trafficking is taking place in Western Australia. I have also given the house statistics, member for Riverton, that
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6149

show that trafficking is occurring in both legal and illegal brothels in Victoria, and I have said that I believe the
same thing will happen in Western Australia. I was happy to take that interjection, because the member for
Riverton missed some of the earlier part of this debate. I cannot support the title “Sexual Services Act”. I think
the community would be in uproar. The Attorney General should send this bill back to the committee, and this
time, rather than give the committee a fixed agenda to look just at the New Zealand model, it should look at what
is happening internationally. It should look at the different options that have been adopted in other countries. It
should look at what the United Nations has to say. It should look at what the United States has to say. We
should not allow this bill to be passed by both houses of this Parliament, with the support of the Greens in the
upper house, because it will lead to not just sexual services, but sexual exploitation. It will lead to a loss of
women’s rights. This bill should not be on the table of this house.
Amendment (deletion of words) put and passed.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr G. Woodhams): Order! The question now is that the words to be inserted be
inserted.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I move -
         To add after “Sexual Services” the following -
                   and Decriminalisation of Brothels and the Living Off the Commercial Sexual Use and Abuse of
                   Young People and Others Pursuant to s. 190 and s. 191 of the Criminal Code
I thank the house for giving me the opportunity to put forward this amendment. I believe this amendment
properly reflects what is in this bill. It properly reflects that sections 190 and 191 of the Criminal Code of this
state currently make it an offence to operate a brothel and to live off the earnings of the bodies of women and
men. That is what this bill is all about. Let us be specific about what this bill really reflects. The title
“Prostitution Act” is wrong. The title “Sexual Services Act” is also wrong. It was the same with the
decriminalisation of cannabis. The title of that bill was also wrong. I spoke about this amendment when we last
debated this bill in consideration in detail, and I have basically said all I can say about this amendment. I urge
members to support the amendment.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: What is the difference between section 190 and section 191 of the Criminal Code?
Ms S.E. WALKER: I read them out last time I spoke. The Criminal Code states -
         190.      Being involved with prostitution
                   (1)      Any person who -
                            (a)       keeps or manages, or acts, or assists in the management of any premises for
                                      purposes of prostitution;
                            (b)       being the tenant, lessee, or occupier of any premises, permits such premises,
                                      or any part thereof, to be used for purposes of prostitution; or
                            (c)       being the lessor or landlord of any premises, or the agent of such lessor or
                                      landlord, lets the same, or any part thereof, or collects the rent with the
                                      knowledge that such premises, or some part thereof, are or is to be used for
                                      purposes of prostitution, or is a party to the continued use of such premises,
                                      or any part thereof, for purposes of prostitution,
                            is guilty of a crime and is liable to imprisonment for 3 years.
                   Summary conviction penalty: imprisonment for 12 months and a fine of $12 000.
                   (2)      For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), a person who appears, acts, or behaves as the
                            person having control of, or the care or management of, any premises is to be taken to
                            be keeping the premises, whether the person is or is not the real keeper.
                   (3)      Any person who lives wholly or partly on earnings that the person knows are the
                            earnings of prostitution is guilty of a crime and is liable to imprisonment for 3 years.
Our argument on this side of the house is that the Attorney General should be upping the penalty. It continues -
                   Summary conviction penalty: imprisonment for 12 months and a fine of $12 000.
This is the pimp legislation that we are getting rid of -
                   (4)      For the purposes of subsection (3), if a person lives with, or is habitually in the
                            company of a prostitute, and has no visible means of subsistence, the person shall,
                            unless he or she can satisfy the court to the contrary, be taken to be living on earnings
                            that the person knows are the earnings of prostitution.
6150                                 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

We know very well that a lot of women are subservient and could be controlled by these evil men. We are
deleting the offence from the code and saying that if those men want to live off the earnings of a woman and
force her by threats and coercion to perform commercial sexual services, that is okay. It is a crime at present.
That is what section 190 of the Criminal Code says. The Criminal Code also states -
         191.     Procuring person to be prostitute etc.
                  (1)       Any person who -
                            (a)       Procures a girl or woman who is under the age of 21 years, and is not a
                                      common prostitute or of known immoral character to have unlawful carnal
                                      connection with a man, either in Western Australia or elsewhere; or
                            ...
                            (c)       Procures a woman or girl to leave Western Australia, with intent that she
                                      may become an inmate of a brothel, elsewhere; or
This is the law in Western Australia at the moment -
                            (d)       Procures a woman or girl to leave her usual place of abode in Western
                                      Australia, such place not being a brothel, with intent that she may, for the
                                      purposes of prostitution, become an inmate of a brothel, either in Western
                                      Australia or elsewhere; or
                            (e)       Procures a man or boy for any of the above purposes;
                            is guilty of a crime . . .
That is what we are getting rid of with this legislation.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The member for Nedlands has referred to sections 190 and 191 of the Criminal Code.
The article by the Australian Centre for the Study of Sexual Assault refers to the Australian Criminal Code Act.
I wonder whether the member for Nedlands has thought about adding a reference to the Australian Criminal
Code Act, because under the Australian Criminal Code Act and international law debt bondage is recognised as a
form of slavery. I do not think that debt bondage is considered a form of slavery under Western Australia’s
current Criminal Code. I therefore wonder whether the member might want to refer to the Criminal Code.
Ms S.E. Walker: What is the reference to the Australian Criminal Code?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The reference was to the Criminal Code Amendment (Trafficking in Persons Offences)
Bill, which would amend division 270 of the Criminal Code, which criminalises slavery, sexual servitude and
deceptive recruiting for sexual services. The bill would also insert new division 271 into the Criminal Code,
which would specifically cover trafficking persons into and within Australia, and debt bondage. The principal
features of the bill were to add an extension to the existing deceptive recruiting for sexual services offence in
section 270.7 of the Criminal Code, and an amendment to the penalty for aggravated sexual servitude offence.
Ms S.E. Walker: What, member?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Section 270.7 refers to the aggravated sexual servitude offence and section 270.6
covers offences of trafficking persons into Australia, a separate offence of trafficking children into Australia -
Ms S.E. Walker: Member, it cannot be the Western Australian Criminal Code, so I do not know what code it is.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: It is not the Western Australian Criminal Code. What I am saying is when you are
looking at the Western Australian Criminal Code -
Ms S.E. Walker: That is what we are decriminalising with this legislation.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I am just pointing out to the member for Nedlands that because this has not come to
the house previously, the Western Australian Criminal Code is lacking in many areas when it comes to dealing
with trafficking, women’s rights and servitude. I am pleased that the member’s amendment refers to sections of
the Criminal Code, but I wanted to point out to the member for Nedlands that Western Australia’s Criminal Code
needs reviewing. The reason the offence was introduced at the commonwealth level was that the commonwealth
was aware that debts associated with sexual servitude could be in the order of $40 000 to $50 000 and that
trafficked women are doing 18 to 20 acts of prostitution a day. They often have to have sex without condoms
and are often exposed to really intense forms of violence, beaten, raped and threatened, and when they are caught
trying to run away, they are beaten and starved. That is why I wonder whether Western Australia’s Criminal
Code goes as far as the commonwealth legislation. It may be that the Attorney General can comment. I am sure
that he knows the Criminal Code very well.
Mr R.F. Johnson: He would not know the Australian Criminal Code; he barely knows the Western Australian
one.
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6151

Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: He would know because he loves looking at legislation. I am sure that is what he does
in the evening. I do not believe that Western Australia’s Criminal Code goes as far as the commonwealth
Criminal Code, because I do not think that we as a Parliament have been aware of the extent of the trafficking of
women in Western Australia and the number of people who have been trafficked into Australia. I would ask the
Attorney General not only to put this bill on the table and come back when a committee has looked at it but also
to look at the Western Australian Criminal Code with a view perhaps to making an addition, such as has been
done at the commonwealth level, which deals with the issue of trafficking of women for sexual servitude.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Very briefly, I understand what the member for Alfred Cove is saying. I have a good deal
of sympathy with what she is saying, but clause 31 of the bill amends the Criminal Code by repealing sections
190 and 191. We are now saying that we should legalise pimps. The state has low unemployment now, but
when figures change people can become pimps. They can beat up the woman or young person they are with and
sell her off for commercial sexual acts. That is okay; that will be the law because the Attorney General is
making this law. People must understand that. That is why, under clause 31, sections 190 and 191 will be
repealed, and that is the key to this legislation. A paper entitled “Women and Global Human Rights” reads -
         Discussions of human rights often fail to acknowledge the unique concerns of women around the globe
         particularly as they relate to the subordination of and injustices against women. Yet clearly, women’s
         rights are human rights concerns. Violence against women and girls is the most pervasive violation of
         human rights in the world today. . . . Eighty percent of the world’s refugees are women and children.
         And as stated by Her Excellency Mary Robinson, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights,
         “Bonded labour and the traffic in women and children have become our modern day versions of
         slavery.” More than 1 million children, mostly girls, are forced into prostitution every year.
This is what the Attorney General is bringing in. Does he know why? He is too busy, he has too many
portfolios and Dr Neale Fong is his substitute Minister for Health. The Attorney General does not read this
legislation, he does not understand it, he does not think about it, and he has not worked out its consequences and
how regressive it is. That is why I am seeking to insert the words in my amendment.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I support the member for Nedlands’ amendment. It is quite clear that the Attorney
General was happy to accept the member for Churchlands’ amendment because at some stage he would have
suggested a similar amendment, probably after the bill reached the upper house. The Attorney General wants to
remove the words “prostitution” and “prostitute” from the legislation. That is a simple fact. If we are talking
about the truth - all legislation should be about the truth - the words that the member for Nedlands is seeking to
insert are a true and accurate reflection of the meaning and outcome of this legislation. We are basically talking
about a description. What the member for Nedlands said about sections of the Criminal Code is absolutely true.
This government is becoming a friend and supporter of pimps. Some government members may not like hearing
that. However, that is what the government is doing. Government members are supporting legislation that will
give pimps legitimacy. This bill will allow pimps to operate legitimate businesses. They will have control over
prostitutes.
Ms S.E. Walker: Over women.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Exactly - over women and young girls. That is what this legislation is about. The newer
government members should think for themselves once in a while. They should not allow themselves to be
herded along by the Attorney General, the most powerful man in Parliament. There is no question that the
Attorney General is the most powerful man in Parliament; indeed, he is more powerful than the Premier. The
newer government members should not be herded along by the factions. They should think for themselves. The
female members on the government’s side of the house are not thinking for themselves. At the end of the day,
the only people who will benefit from this legislation are the pimps and the madams, who are really the same.
Not only will this bill benefit the pimps and madams who run brothels, but also it will benefit the pimps who
oversee the prostitutes who work in the suburbs, which could be up to two at a time. In other jurisdictions there
has been not only a massive increase in new legalised brothels, but also an exponential increase in the number of
illegal brothels. Once an activity is legalised, it is much easier for people to carry on their illegal activities,
which is why there are so many illegal brothels operating in Victoria. That is a classic case. That will happen in
Western Australia. There will be a massive proliferation of illegal brothels. Prostitutes will not benefit from this
bill, because it will provide greater authority to pimps. The word “pimp” is not a pleasant word, but I use it
because it more accurately reflects those who live off the immoral earnings of women who are forced into
degrading themselves by becoming prostitutes. As I have said before, many prostitutes are drug addicts who
have no other means of feeding their habit. Who supplies prostitutes with drugs? The pimps supply the drugs.
They are the ones who make the real money. All the prostitutes earn is enough money to feed their drug
addiction. We have heard some of the terrible stories told by prostitutes at Linda’s House of Hope. Linda’s role
in life is to try to help prostitutes. We are talking about a description. The words suggested by the member for
Nedlands are more accurate. The member for Churchlands wants to ensure that the title of the act is more
reflective of the content of the bill for the sake of uniformity and logic. The words suggested by the member for
6152                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Nedlands make it even more logical. The member for Nedlands’ amendment is a more accurate description of
what will happen once the bill becomes law. The Attorney General is doing away with the word “prostitution”
from the title of the legislation. If he is going to do that, the title should reflect the true nature of the work done
by prostitutes and pimps. We are talking about prostitutes and prostitution.
                                                       Quorum
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Mr Acting Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the house.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr G. Woodhams): There are 19 members in the house.
                                                  Debate Resumed
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The member for Nedlands wants to delete the word “prostitution” and insert instead
“Decriminalisation of Brothels and the Living Off the Commercial Sexual Use and Abuse of Young People and
Others Pursuant to s. 190 and s. 191 of the Criminal Code”. I will be supporting her amendment. I do not know
whether the correct term is “decriminalisation” or “legalisation”. However, it is basically legalisation. The
Attorney General was not in the chamber when I gave my second reading contribution on this bill. However, the
next day he said that a lot of unsubstantiated facts had been put on the table. I have gone to great effort to
provide the sources of my facts so that the Attorney General realises that reports are being published in
Australia, America and Europe. The U.S. Department of State believes that -
         “Legalisation of prostitution expands the market for commercial sex, opening market for criminal
         enterprises and creating a safe haven for criminals who traffic people into prostitution . . . Legalisation
         simply makes it easier for them to blend in with a purportedly regulated sex sector and makes it more
         difficult for prosecutors to identify and punish those who are trafficking people.”
Again, I come back to the issue of trafficking. Human trafficking happens now and it will continue to increase.
The United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery urges states to ensure that their policies
and laws do not legitimise prostitution as the victims’ choice of work or promote the legalisation or regulation of
prostitution. The Attorney General is legalising or decriminalising prostitution, which is why it is important that
the member for Nedlands’ amendment is passed. People must realise what this bill is about. The member for
Nedlands’ suggested title does not include the word “trafficking”. The title should refer to trafficking, because
this bill will lead to an increase in the trafficking of people in Western Australia. Today I provided evidence that
trafficking takes place. It is a shame that the committee that looked at the issue of prostitution spoke only to a
Western Australian policeman and not to a member of the Australian Federal Police. If it had, it might have
been made aware of the trafficking issue and the bill that is on the table tonight might not be before us. This is a
good amendment. I cannot see why the Attorney General would not want to support it. The member for Avon
supported the member for Churchlands’ amendment because he believes that we should put the record right.
Although I agree that these words should be inserted, I cannot support this bill. This bill is so abhorrent that it
will do much damage to my local community and to everyone else’s local community.
Mr M.P. Whitely interjected.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: There was a brothel in my electorate, and I believe there is another one. A lot of
people are very concerned that there is another one on Canning Highway. The other one was in a residential
street, and people were very unhappy because schoolchildren were walking past that brothel on their way to and
from school. This legislation will result in an expansion of those brothels.
Mr M.P. Whitely: What have you done about the one in your electorate?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: When the community approached me, I tried very hard to encourage the council to not
give those people a licence. However, unfortunately, the council licensed them, just as under this bill councils
will not be able to stop them. If the councils say no, they do not want a brothel in a particular suburb, the people
who own the brothel will take the matter to the State Administrative Tribunal, which will look at the
government’s agenda to increase the number of brothels and say, “Fine. Let it go ahead.” Therefore, there will
be brothels in every suburb within the community, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: This is just a technicality. I have been trying to see how the clause will read if the
amendment is successful. I presume that if the amendment is successful, the clause will read, “Sexual Services
and Decriminalisation of Brothels and the Living Off the Commercial Sexual Use and Abuse of Young People
and Others Pursuant to s. 190 and s. 191 of the Criminal Code” -
Mr J.A. McGinty: “Act”.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: It must include “Act”. That is what I was going to say.
Mr J.A. McGinty: The effect of the amendment is to insert those words in the middle of the member for
Churchlands’ amendment.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Therefore, the word “Act” remains there, Attorney General.
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                       6153

Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: That is fine. Just to show that I have no ill feelings in this house, I indicate that I
will support the member for Nedlands’ amendment, even though the member was very ungracious -
Mr R.F. Johnson: It was only a trial separation.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: It was a trial separation. It does part of the process that we argued about before of
correctly defining the bill, and it still does the bit that the Attorney General seems to be pretty keen on and does
not use those terrible words “prostitution” or “prostitute”. In my position, when we get a little further into this
bill and start talking about the operation of brothels, I still argue that the reality is that the vast majority of
women operating outside brothels - why would they operate inside a brothel, with all the rules, when they can
operate outside a brothel, with no rules - will actually be prostitutes. Therefore, we are getting to a position at
which we are more clearly defining the title of this legislation, and that is a good thing for the house. Before the
member for Nedlands read out sections 190 and 191, I was not aware what those sections related to, but I was
pretty sure that they had to be the two sections that relate to running a premises and using the services of a
prostitute. The point is that this legislation will clearly repeal those two sections of the Criminal Code. I
presume, member for Nedlands, that they repeal those two sections.
Ms S.E. Walker: Yes.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: That in itself is a good reason for referring in the title of the act to the fact that those
two sections used to exist. I congratulate the member for Nedlands, because it points out the purpose of this bill,
which is to make it clear that the offences referred to in those two sections of the Criminal Code will no longer
be criminal offences. If this proposed title is accepted, when the people of Western Australia view this
legislation following its passage through the two houses, they will be very clear, if they look up the Criminal
Code on the Internet, about which two very longstanding sections of the Criminal Code have been removed by
this legislation. One relates to the management and operation of a brothel and living off the earnings of that
brothel, and the other one relates to - this gets closer to the member for Alfred Cove’s point - the abuse of
women. Section 191 is really about the abuse of women. As the member for Nedlands stated when she was
reading that section, it refers to inmates. No matter how old that section may be - I presume, member for
Nedlands, it goes back a number of years - we cannot deny the import of the word “inmate”. It makes it very
clear that the intent of the original legislation was to say that this particular activity was clearly derogatory of
women, even though the legislation was probably written 100 years ago or something like that. This is a clearer
announcement of the title and definition of the bill.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I believe it is important that we have these words on the record. The member for
Nedlands’ amendment states “Decriminalisation of Brothels and the Living Off the Commercial Sexual Use and
Abuse of Young People and Others”. The Australian Centre for the Study of Sexual Assault states -
         The most extensive international study of violence in prostitution to date has shown extremely high
         levels of physical violence (73 per cent) and rape (62 per cent) of women in prostitution, with 66 per
         cent suffering post-traumatic stress syndrome (regardless of nationality, place of prostitution, legality of
         prostitution or level of violence) . . . It can safely be assumed that the levels of violence trafficked
         women experience will be even greater.
Even though the centre gives those figures, it goes on to say -
         Yet all women in the sex industry -
That is, the sex industry under our “Sexual Services Act” -
         suffer increased levels of rape and violence and are in need of support services.
There is one thing that this bill does not discuss and that this government is not providing. In Queensland, the
health department has a contract that it gives to help people who are assisting those prostitutes who want to leave
the industry. At page 11 of a 1996 study by Noske and Deacon, it states that 64.2 per cent of women want to
leave the industry. We know that there are a lot of prostitutes in the industry - we discussed this the last time the
bill came before the house - who would like to leave the industry. However, they are hooked on drugs, they
have to pay their debts and they have children. They know that they will not get a house through Homeswest
and they are likely to lose their children. What are we doing? The only organisation that seems to be doing
something for those people is the Catholic Church and the only person who is doing anything is Linda Watson
with her House of Hope. Why has something not been done by this government about putting up some funds so
that people can put forward a tender to the government to work with the prostitutes here in Western Australia
who want to get out of the industry? Maybe in working with those prostitutes who want to get out of the
industry, we will come across even more cases of people who are trafficked into that industry. I support this
amendment because it refers to living off the commercial sexual use and abuse of young people and others. That
is what this bill will do. I believe the figures show that something like 80 to 90 per cent of prostitutes are
women. I said that this is a women’s issue because of the large number of women in WA who are currently
6154                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

prostitutes. This government is not doing anything to help those people get out of prostitution. In fact, it is
saying, “Let’s grow the industry.” I am surprised that the Minister for Tourism has not put something out
saying, “We’re going to be one of the sex states.” I remember many years ago that WA was the state of
excitement. I would not be surprised if the government wanted to bring something like that back in. This is all
about taking away women’s rights.
                                      Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm
Amendment on the amendment (insertion of words) put and a division taken with the following result -
                                                      Ayes (17)

Mr C.J. Barnett              Mr J.H.D. Day                Mr D.T. Redman                  Dr J.M. Woollard
Mr T.R. Buswell              Ms K. Hodson-Thomas          Mr G. Snook                     Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)
Mr G.M. Castrilli            Dr G.G. Jacobs               Dr S.C. Thomas
Dr E. Constable              Mr R.F. Johnson              Mr M.W. Trenorden
Mr M.J. Cowper               Mr P.D. Omodei               Ms S.E. Walker

                                                      Noes (24)

Mr P.W. Andrews              Mr R.C. Kucera               Mrs C.A. Martin                 Mrs M.H. Roberts
Mr A.J. Carpenter            Mr F.M. Logan                Mr P. Papalia                   Mr T.G. Stephens
Dr J.M. Edwards              Mr J.A. McGinty              Mr J.R. Quigley                 Mr D.A. Templeman
Mrs D.J. Guise               Mr M. McGowan                Ms M.M. Quirk                   Mr P.B. Watson
Mr J.N. Hyde                 Ms S.M. McHale               Ms J.A. Radisich                Mr M.P. Whitely
Mr J.C. Kobelke              Mr A.D. McRae                Mr E.S. Ripper                  Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)



                                                        Pair

                             Mr T.R. Sprigg                                   Mr B.S. Wyatt

Amendment thus negatived.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: It is a great shame that the government defeated the amendment put forward by the
member for Nedlands because I believe it more aptly described the content, the will, and the meaning of this bill.
We are now left with the member for Churchlands’ amendment, which will simply change the description from
Prostitution Act to “Sexual Services Act”, which does not adequately describe the content or the will of this bill
and certainly does not describe what this bill is all about. This bill is not simply about sex workers. I have said
it before and I will say it again: this bill could be easily mistaken for one that deals with the work of sex
therapists. I believe those people, who are far more qualified than a prostitute to deal with male or female sex
problems, will be very upset to know that they may easily be mistaken for prostitutes because the descriptive title
of this legislation will be different from the meaning and the true essence of this bill. This bill is about
prostitution. It is about prostitutes and brothels. It is about pimps and it is about the people who live off the
immoral earnings of prostitutes, those women who are often forced to be involved in this seedy type of trade. I
will call it a trade because it is not a business; it is a trade because women are traded over and over again. As the
member for Alfred Cove has said many times during this debate, this bill leaves it wide open for what I term the
dregs of our society to traffic in human bodies, particularly women. At the end of the day, that is prostitution. It
is not some sort of flamboyant description of sex worker. I think it does a great disservice to not only the women
who unfortunately find themselves in this position, but also women in general. I have had many
communications from people in Western Australia about this issue. Many of them, of course, were women, but
many of them were men. I have had a tremendous amount of support for the rhetorical question I put to
members opposite, including the Premier, about whether any member of the Labor Party would want his or her
daughters to become prostitutes in what is soon to become a legal business profession. We have heard a lot
during this debate about what has happened in Germany. In Germany, if unemployed people who are working in
the hospitality industry do not accept a job as a prostitute - or sex worker, as the Attorney General prefers to call
them - they will lose their unemployment benefit. I wonder whether that is the intention of this government. It
is interesting that we have debated this amendment on an amendment for over three hours. I suggest that part of
the reason for the delay is that the Attorney General has not once stood during that time and answered any of the
questions, comments or statements made by members on this side of the house; he has just sat there. He has only
stood to raise a point of order about somebody saying something two or three times, or about something not
being relevant to the clause before the house. Fair enough; that is a justifiable reason for a point of order.
However, he has not once stood to answer any of the comments or criticisms that I have levelled at him and his
government, which is bereft of moral standing in our society. The Attorney General is doing a disservice to the
people of Western Australia, particularly the women and young girls. I will keep standing until the Attorney
General gets to his feet and answers some of the questions, comments and criticisms that members of the
opposition have put to him about this bill.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                         6155

Ms S.E. WALKER: Tonight is the first time that the Attorney General has looked at the sections of the
Criminal Code that will be repealed by this bill. Until just before dinner, when he summoned one of the
attendants to bring him the Criminal Code, the Attorney General was not aware of what this bill would do. I
know that because he read it for the first time. Quite frankly, if I were the Attorney General, I would just call a
halt and get rid of this bill; I would take it away because it is regressive for women. He must know that, after
having read the sections of the Criminal Code that show him what he is doing. He is legalising prostitution as a
career option for women. He is legalising brothels as businesses, so that brothel owners can get 50 per cent of
the profit from every sexual act a client has with a prostitute; I know it is 50 per cent because of the research I
did last time. The Attorney General is trying to make prostitution a normal business. I listened to what the
member for Hillarys had to say, and he mentioned that the use of the words “Sexual Services Act” implies a
service such as that provided by a sex therapist. That is also what Mary Lucille Sullivan claims in her book
Making Sex Work: A Failed Experiment With Legalised Prostitution, in which she refers to the Victorian model.
She states -
         Touching Base unreservedly promotes prostituted women as ‘sex therapists’. Indeed it makes the
         argument that those within the industry have unique skills that allow them to service buyers’ special
         needs . . .
She continues -
         Another strategy that Touching Base adopts to further prostitution business interests is to . . . have
         access to prostituted women and pornography’ or what it terms ‘delivery and receipt of sex services’.
This is the same author who said that the terminology had been softened so that prostitution seems normal. Let
us call it what it is. She states at page 176 -
         I find it disturbing that in the context where no funding is available for exit programs for prostituted
         women, it is acceptable that funds are made available so that men are not restricted in accessing
         ‘prostitution services’.
When the house votes on this amendment, I will abstain because I do not believe that the term “Sexual Services
Act” reflects what this bill is really about. It is a softening of the terminology, and I do not agree with that. I do
not believe in voting for the term “Prostitution Act”, either. That is a degrading, stigmatised name for women.
The bill changes the word “prostitute” to “sex worker”, but the person who uses the sex worker - in Victoria the
term is “sex user” - is still referred to as a “client”. I will abstain from voting - I again put this on record so that
my electorate knows why I am doing this - for the reason that this amendment does not reflect what this bill
does. It does not reflect the fact that it legalises brothels. It legitimises not only prostitution as a career option
for women, but also pimping as a career option for men - it will largely be men who are pimps. The only reason
pimps are pimps - we have all seen this over the years on television or whatever - is that they actually brutalise
and dominate these women, live off their earnings and send them out to earn money for sexual favours and
services. That is what the Attorney General is doing, so I will abstain from the vote on that basis.
[Quorum formed.]
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will keep getting to my feet until the Attorney General has the fortitude to stand and
explain to this house and particularly to opposition members how he justifies the criticisms that -
Mr J.A. McGinty: It’s not my amendment; it’s the member for Churchlands’ amendment.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The Attorney General has heard many criticisms during this particular debate; he has
heard them for three and a half hours. He has not once stood to answer the concerns, questions and criticisms in
relation to this amendment that have come from this debate. Until he does, I will continue to stand. I want him
to stand and justify this amendment to the people of Western Australia and to answer the questions and
criticisms that have been put by opposition members so that his answer can be on record. The Attorney General
and his government are the friends of pimps. That is a description I would hate to have levelled against me. He
is doing the pimps a favour with his legislation. I knew that the Attorney General would accept the amendment
of the member for Churchlands because in a way she has played into his hands. I know why she has moved it.
She has moved it for legitimate reasons and to make logical sense of the legislation.
Quite frankly, this legislation is rubbish in many respects. If the member for Perth had a hand in putting it
together, I have real and serious concerns. From what the Attorney General said in his second reading speech,
the member for Perth did have a hand in it, together with Hon Giz Watson and Hon Sue Ellery. They have
played a major part in this bill. If we have to rely on those people for good legislation and for good moral
standing in our society, God help us. We on this side of the house have concerns. I knew the Attorney General
would accept the proposed title of the legislation because it has made it easier for him. It takes away the
terminology of “prostitution”. At the end of the day, “prostitution”, “prostitutes” or “prostitution activities” will
not be mentioned in the bill. The main bill that is being amended will be a completely different bill. It will be
6156                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

something from fairyland. Prostitution will be a legitimate business. I know for a fact that some people have
already started buying properties around the place because they are relying on the bill being passed. I wonder
just how much communication some of the Labor members have had with people in the prostitution industry. I
would assume that they have had quite a bit if the task force did its job properly. They would have spoken to
people in the prostitution industry. Yet the member for Perth told us that he has not spoken to people in the
industry. He told this house earlier today that he had not had one word with the prostitution owners, managers,
pimps, madams or whatever we want to call them for three years. I find that extraordinary.
Mr C.J. Barnett: You think they would have had a few telephone conversations. He’s a man of his word. He
says three years.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: He said he had not spoken to anyone in the industry for three years. It will be very
interesting to see whether that is accurate. At the end of the day, the member for Perth is doing us all a favour.
The people in my electorate do not want prostitutes working out of houses in residential streets. I do not want
them in my street. I think most people would not want them in their streets. That is what will happen. They will
be prostitutes. They will not be given this new enlightened term of “sex workers”. They will be more than that.
They will be prostituting their bodies for money. That may not be seen with any great sense of morality as far as
some Labor members are concerned. That is fine; that is okay. I think the general population do not agree with
that.
I ask the Attorney General to get to his feet and justify some of the criticisms that members opposite have -
Mr J.A. McGinty: I will do that when we come to the relevant clauses.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: It is all relevant.
Mr J.A. McGinty: We have been on the title for three hours. It is a filibuster on your part.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No, it is not. I want the Attorney General to get to his feet because he has heard a lot of
comments -
Mr J.A. McGinty: I will not breach standing orders, as you people have incessantly.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: We are talking about the title. The amendment has been moved. There should not be an
amendment. The title should include the word “prostitution”.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I will not be supporting the amendment proposing a new title for this bill. I do not
believe it reflects what this bill will do to our community. It does not reflect the fact that there will be growth in
the numbers of legal and illegal brothels and the numbers of women who are being trafficked to Western
Australia will escalate. Since the Attorney General put this bill on the table, I have been working with various
community groups, some of whom disagree with this bill very much on moral grounds. Others disagree with
this bill because they feel that it takes away women’s rights. They feel that this bill will make it worse for
women in WA and it denigrates the role of women.
I am very disappointed that all the government will do with this bill is enable the industry to grow rather than do
anything to help those people who are in the industry. I have met many prostitutes. Many of them are very nice
people who want to get out of the industry. This government is doing nothing to help those people get out of the
industry, unlike the Queensland government, which is trying to help people get out of the industry. I believe that
the federal government has contributed to the tune of $58 million since October 2003 to try to decrease people
trafficking. I congratulate the federal Liberal government as it is actually doing something to try to stop
trafficking. This bill does not do anything to stop trafficking. This bill will enable the trafficking that we have
now to grow.
I gave statistics earlier, saying that 67 per cent of women are being abused. More women will be abused as a
result of this bill. I know that we have similar aged daughters, Madam Acting Speaker (Mrs J. Hughes), because
I saw the article about your daughter getting stuck down south, and I know how frightening that must have been
for you. My daughter is a similar age. When I saw that article, I realised that we would have very similar
feelings about our children. We would not want our children or our children’s friends to be looking at this as an
acceptable industry. I have repeatedly tried to show the Attorney General the statistics because I do not believe
the task force that looked into this matter put forward those statistics. None of those statistics showing the
number of women who are being trafficked, the number of women who are being abused, where those women
are being trafficked from, how they are being moved around Australia, what actually happens in those brothels,
what they go through to pay off their debts and the type of living quarters they have to live in were in that report.
We know that a lot of people have got into prostitution because they were homeless or they may have been
abused at home. With this bill, this government is saying that it is okay for girls to go into prostitution. I do not
think it is okay. I would hate to think my girls were going into prostitution. I am sure you, Madam Acting
Speaker, would not like to see your daughters or your daughter’s friends go into prostitution and work in a legal
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                       6157

or an illegal brothel. I cannot support the amendment and I will vote against it. Like many people in this house
tonight, I will be voting against every clause of this bill.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I move -
          To add after “Sexual Services” -
                    provided by women of Western Australia for the sexual gratification and abuse of men for the
                    commercial benefit of pimps, brothel owners, drug traffickers and organised crime
Because the amendment moved by the member for Churchlands does not reflect what the bill is about, like the
members for Hillarys, Avon and Alfred Cove, I will keep trying to put forward my point about what this bill is
really about. My amendment on the amendment states what this bill is really about. It is about the abuse of
Western Australian women by some men for commercial benefit to pimps, drug traffickers, organised crime and
brothel owners. All the women on the government side of the house support this bill. As I said when this
legislation was first contemplated in 2003, I would not stand in this house and vote for anything that I would not
vote for as a career option for my own children. I had a look at the report of the Royal Commission into Matters
Surrounding the Administration of the Law Relating to Prostitution of 1975-76. I am so sick of hearing the
phrase about this being the oldest industry in the world. So what! Are we not progressive in this state? The
Attorney General comes out with a lot of nonsense sometimes. He says that we are unique in the world with this
legislation. I think this legislation is unique in being so regressive. The report of the royal commission looked at
the same provisions that we are looking at here - sections 190 and 191 of the Criminal Code. These sections
were included because they protect women from abuse. Section 190 is very telling. Section 190(2) states -
          For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), a person who appears, acts, or behaves as the person having
          control of, or the care or management of, any premises is to be taken to be keeping the premises,
          whether the person is or is not the real keeper.
Section 190(3) states -
          Any person who lives wholly or partly on earnings that the person knows are the earnings of
          prostitution is guilty of a crime . . .
This is where this legislation legalises pimps, making it a legitimate career option to brutalise and dominate
women and send them out to perform sexual services so that they can support the man. The women on the
government side think it is all right. I hear not a squeak or a peep from any of them. Section 190(4) states -
          For the purposes of subsection (3), if a person lives with, or is habitually in the company of a prostitute,
          and has no visible means of subsistence, the person shall, unless he or she can satisfy the court to the
          contrary, be taken to be living on earnings that the person knows are the earnings of prostitution.
Does the Attorney General now think that is okay? He knows very well it is not okay. It is rank hypocrisy, as I
have said, for the Attorney General to talk the way he has about how he is protecting women, and then to
introduce this bill. We see, for the first time in this Parliament, the Attorney General call for the Criminal Code
to see what he is actually doing with this bill. He can look at what he has allowed his factional partners in the
government to do to women in this state.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: We reach a stage in every debate at which enough is enough. We have had three hours of
opposition and Independent members speaking repetitively, not raising anything relevant, and we are still
dealing with only the title of the act.

                                                 Question to be Put
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I move -
          That the question be now put.
Question put and a division taken with the following result -
                                                       Ayes (25)

Mr P.W. Andrews               Mr F.M. Logan                Mr P. Papalia                Mr D.A. Templeman
Mr A.J. Carpenter             Mr J.A. McGinty              Mr J.R. Quigley              Mr P.B. Watson
Dr J.M. Edwards               Mr M. McGowan                Ms M.M. Quirk                Mr M.P. Whitely
Mrs D.J. Guise                Ms S.M. McHale               Ms J.A. Radisich             Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)
Mr J.N. Hyde                  Mr A.D. McRae                Mr E.S. Ripper
Mr J.C. Kobelke               Mrs C.A. Martin              Mrs M.H. Roberts
Mr R.C. Kucera                Mr M.P. Murray               Mr T.G. Stephens
6158                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

                                                       Noes (20)

Mr C.J. Barnett              Mr M.J. Cowper                Mr P.D. Omodei                  Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan      Mr J.H.D. Day                 Mr D.T. Redman                  Ms S.E. Walker
Mr T.R. Buswell              Dr K.D. Hames                 Mr G. Snook                     Mr G.A. Woodhams
Mr G.M. Castrilli            Dr G.G. Jacobs                Dr S.C. Thomas                  Dr J.M. Woollard
Dr E. Constable              Mr R.F. Johnson               Mr M.W. Trenorden               Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)




                                                         Pairs

                             Mr B.S. Wyatt                                     Mr T.R. Sprigg
                             Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan                              Ms K. Hodson-Thomas
                             Mr A.P. O'Gorman                                  Mr J.E. McGrath

Question thus passed.
                                                    Debate Resumed
Amendment on the amendment (insertion of words) put and a division taken with the following result -
                                                       Ayes (20)

Mr C.J. Barnett              Mr M.J. Cowper                Mr P.D. Omodei                  Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan      Mr J.H.D. Day                 Mr D.T. Redman                  Ms S.E. Walker
Mr T.R. Buswell              Dr K.D. Hames                 Mr G. Snook                     Mr G.A. Woodhams
Mr G.M. Castrilli            Dr G.G. Jacobs                Dr S.C. Thomas                  Dr J.M. Woollard
Dr E. Constable              Mr R.F. Johnson               Mr M.W. Trenorden               Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)


                                                       Noes (25)

Mr P.W. Andrews              Mr F.M. Logan                 Mr P. Papalia                   Mr D.A. Templeman
Mr A.J. Carpenter            Mr J.A. McGinty               Mr J.R. Quigley                 Mr P.B. Watson
Dr J.M. Edwards              Mr M. McGowan                 Ms M.M. Quirk                   Mr M.P. Whitely
Mrs D.J. Guise               Ms S.M. McHale                Ms J.A. Radisich                Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)
Mr J.N. Hyde                 Mr A.D. McRae                 Mr E.S. Ripper
Mr J.C. Kobelke              Mrs C.A. Martin               Mrs M.H. Roberts
Mr R.C. Kucera               Mr M.P. Murray                Mr T.G. Stephens




                                                         Pairs

                             Mr T.R. Sprigg                                    Mr B.S. Wyatt
                             Ms K. Hodson-Thomas                               Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan
                             Mr J.E. McGrath                                   Mr A.P. O’Gorman

Amendment thus negatived.
The ACTING SPEAKER: The question now is that the member for Churchlands’ words to be inserted be
inserted.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: We will vote on this amendment very shortly. I make it quite clear that although the
Liberal Party accepts the logical intent of the member for Churchlands’ amendment, we cannot support the
reality of the outcome of that amendment because it would legitimise the title of the act, which is all about
prostitution, prostitutes and sex workers. If the title of the bill were amended to the “Sexual Services Act”, it
would not be a true reflection of the outcome of the bill. We accept that the term “sexual services” will follow
through because of the Attorney General’s intention to ensure that there will be no mention of “prostitute” or
“prostitution” in the bill when it is passed. The Attorney General is making sure that those words are deleted
from every clause in the bill because he wants to give some respectability to prostitution, pimps and other people
who live off the immoral earnings of women who are in the unfortunate position of working as prostitutes. The
bill will legitimise the sexual services industry as a legitimate business like any other. I can understand the logic
behind member for Churchlands’s amendment to the title of the act. However, the Liberal Party is poles apart
from the Labor Party on this issue. The media has already picked up on the difference between the moral
standing and integrity of members of the Liberal Party and the moral standing and integrity of members of the
Labor Party. This will be an election issue. We will not agree with this amendment because it does not truly
reflect the intent of the bill. It might reflect the outcome of the terminology, but not the actual outcome of what
the bill will deliver, which we believe will be nothing but harm to women and young girls in Western Australia
in particular, and some young boys and men in some cases. We cannot agree with this amendment.
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                              6159

                                                   Question to be Put
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I move -
          That the question be now put.

Question put and a division taken with the following result -

                                                        Ayes (25)

Mr P.W. Andrews             Mr F.M. Logan                   Mr P. Papalia                  Mr D.A. Templeman
Mr A.J. Carpenter           Mr J.A. McGinty                 Mr J.R. Quigley                Mr P.B. Watson
Dr J.M. Edwards             Mr M. McGowan                   Ms M.M. Quirk                  Mr M.P. Whitely
Mrs D.J. Guise              Ms S.M. McHale                  Ms J.A. Radisich               Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)
Mr J.N. Hyde                Mr A.D. McRae                   Mr E.S. Ripper
Mr J.C. Kobelke             Mrs C.A. Martin                 Mrs M.H. Roberts
Mr R.C. Kucera              Mr M.P. Murray                  Mr T.G. Stephens


                                                        Noes (20)

Mr C.J. Barnett             Mr M.J. Cowper                  Mr P.D. Omodei                 Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan     Mr J.H.D. Day                   Mr D.T. Redman                 Ms S.E. Walker
Mr T.R. Buswell             Dr K.D. Hames                   Mr G. Snook                    Mr G.A. Woodhams
Mr G.M. Castrilli           Dr G.G. Jacobs                  Dr S.C. Thomas                 Dr J.M. Woollard
Dr E. Constable             Mr R.F. Johnson                 Mr M.W. Trenorden              Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)




                                                          Pairs

                            Mr B.S. Wyatt                                       Mr T.R. Sprigg
                            Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan                                Ms K. Hodson-Thomas
                            Mr A.P. O'Gorman                                    Mr J.E. McGrath

Question thus passed.

                                                   Debate Resumed

Amendment (insertion of words) put and a division taken with the following result -

                                                        Ayes (27)

Mr P.W. Andrews             Mr R.C. Kucera                  Mr M.P. Murray                 Mr T.G. Stephens
Mr A.J. Carpenter           Mr F.M. Logan                   Mr P. Papalia                  Mr D.A. Templeman
Dr E. Constable             Mr J.A. McGinty                 Mr J.R. Quigley                Mr M.W. Trenorden
Dr J.M. Edwards             Mr M. McGowan                   Ms M.M. Quirk                  Mr P.B. Watson
Mrs D.J. Guise              Ms S.M. McHale                  Ms J.A. Radisich               Mr M.P. Whitely
Mr J.N. Hyde                Mr A.D. McRae                   Mr E.S. Ripper                 Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)
Mr J.C. Kobelke             Mrs C.A. Martin                 Mrs M.H. Roberts


                                                        Noes (17)

Mr C.J. Barnett             Mr J.H.D. Day                   Mr D.T. Redman                 Dr J.M. Woollard
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan     Dr K.D. Hames                   Mr G. Snook                    Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)
Mr T.R. Buswell             Dr G.G. Jacobs                  Dr S.C. Thomas
Mr G.M. Castrilli           Mr R.F. Johnson                 Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr M.J. Cowper              Mr P.D. Omodei                  Mr G.A. Woodhams




                                                          Pairs

                            Mr B.S. Wyatt                                       Mr T.R. Sprigg
                            Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan                                Ms K. Hodson-Thomas
                            Mr A.P. O'Gorman                                    Mr J.E. McGrath


Amendment thus passed.
Clause, as amended, put and a division taken with the following result -
6160                                  [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

                                                         Ayes (27)

Mr P.W. Andrews                Mr R.C. Kucera                Mr M.P. Murray                Mr T.G. Stephens
Mr A.J. Carpenter              Mr F.M. Logan                 Mr P. Papalia                 Mr D.A. Templeman
Dr E. Constable                Mr J.A. McGinty               Mr J.R. Quigley               Mr M.W. Trenorden
Dr J.M. Edwards                Mr M. McGowan                 Ms M.M. Quirk                 Mr P.B. Watson
Mrs D.J. Guise                 Ms S.M. McHale                Ms J.A. Radisich              Mr M.P. Whitely
Mr J.N. Hyde                   Mr A.D. McRae                 Mr E.S. Ripper                Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)
Mr J.C. Kobelke                Mrs C.A. Martin               Mrs M.H. Roberts


                                                         Noes (17)

Mr C.J. Barnett                Mr J.H.D. Day                 Mr D.T. Redman                Dr J.M. Woollard
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan        Dr K.D. Hames                 Mr G. Snook                   Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)
Mr T.R. Buswell                Dr G.G. Jacobs                Dr S.C. Thomas
Mr G.M. Castrilli              Mr R.F. Johnson               Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr M.J. Cowper                 Mr P.D. Omodei                Mr G.A. Woodhams




                                                           Pairs

                               Mr B.S. Wyatt                                    Mr T.R. Sprigg
                               Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan                             Ms K. Hodson-Thomas
                               Mr A.P. O'Gorman                                 Mr J.E. McGrath

Clause, as amended, thus passed.
Clause 5: Section 3 amended -
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I move -
          Page 3, line 14 - To insert after “ “act as a prostitute”, ” -
                    “act of prostitution”,
This might seem a strange thing to do -
Mr R.F. Johnson: Everything you do is strange, but I want you to explain the rationale behind it.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Okay. Now let me -
Mr R.F. Johnson: I would like to hear your voice other than raising a point of order tonight.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Let me enlighten the member for Hillarys. The effect of this amendment is to delete the
definition “act of prostitution” from the definitions in the act. We do not seek to put anything in its place; it is
simply to correct a drafting error that occurred when the legislation was prepared. Currently, “act of
prostitution” is defined to mean “anything the doing of which amounts to prostitution”, so it is a fairly
meaningless definition. However, the bill has already had inserted a definition of a “commercial sexual act” that
“has the meaning it has under section 4”. Therefore, the effect of inserting the words “act of prostitution” into
the bill is to delete the definition of the “act of prostitution” from section 3 of the act. The effect of this
amendment is to ensure consistency; it was simply an oversight when the legislation was prepared.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: As I understand it, it is a bit of a whitewash job really. This is where the Attorney
General is once again trying to camouflage “prostitution”, “act of prostitution” and “prostitute”. He wants to
water it down, so that the bill will not mention any of those words. If this amendment is successful, which it will
be, obviously, because the government has the numbers to do it, the bill will simply say “commercial sexual
act”; correct?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Inadvertently, “act of prostitution” was left in the definitions section, which it was never
intended to be, so this is to ensure that -
Mr R.F. Johnson: Of course, it was not intended because the Attorney General does not want that word
mentioned anywhere. It is a bit like Basil Fawlty.
Mr M.J. Cowper: Don’t mention the war!
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I think I will mention the war. They got away with it; mention the war once. That is
what it is; the Attorney General does not want the words “prostitution” or “prostitute” mentioned anywhere in
this bill, which will eventually form part of the act. I find that disgraceful, quite frankly, and I have to tell the
Attorney General that he has not justified it with any real reason. He has given some sort of grammatical
justification. This always happens with the Attorney General’s legislation; whenever his own legislation comes
into consideration in detail, he is always amending it. Always doing it!
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                       6161

Mr J.A. McGinty: To achieve higher levels of perfection.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No, it is because the Attorney General has to cover up what is commonly known in the
United Kingdom as “cock-ups”. The Attorney General makes these mistakes, he obviously does not read this
stuff properly, it is a case of “Get it in quickly. I want some more legislation: I love sitting at the table of the
house; I love all the attention being on me: I love it when the member for Hillarys gets up and has a go at me”,
because that is the type of person the Attorney General is. He is an attention seeker. There is no doubt about it!
This is what I tell all my friends: the Attorney General is an absolute attention seeker, and he will get the
attention tonight.
We certainly oppose this amendment for the same reason we have opposed other amendments; that is, we
believe this bill should reflect, even in some remote way, what it is all about. It is about prostitution. It is about
prostitutes. It is not about sex workers or sexual services workers. I say once again that that could be anybody.
It could be a doctor specialising in sexual services who tries to enhance the abilities of people, male or female,
who might have problems. They could be mistaken for people who are associated with this bill, which any
thinking person will know is about prostitution, prostitutes and pimps, the abuse of women and living off the
immoral earnings of some women. The opposition will oppose this amendment. We know it will get through
the house; the government has the numbers. We on this side of the house have very high morals and we will not
agree to anything that we believe will diminish the moral standing of the overwhelming majority of people in
Western Australia.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I do not mind whether we discuss this now or under clause 4. It says that “client” has
the meaning it has under section 4 -
Mr R.F. Johnson: We have dealt with clause 4.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mrs J. Hughes): This is clause 5, member.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Shivers!
Ms S.E. WALKER: I was going to move an amendment to delete lines 14 and 15 before the Attorney General
moved his amendment because I thought it was once again rank hypocrisy for him to delete the definitions of
“act as a prostitute”, “prostitute”, “prostitution” and, now, “act of prostitution”. The Attorney General is making
the term “prostitute” sound normal by deleting this definition, although in a later provision a prostitute is called a
sex worker. However, under section 4 of the Prostitution Act, the client is still called the client. Under the Equal
Opportunity Act, it would be discriminatory to call a female worker in the sex industry a sex worker and to call
the male a client, or vice versa. Why are they not being called sex workers and sex worker users? I want to
delete the hypocritical nature of this provision of the bill. Obviously, I cannot do that now because the Attorney
General has moved an amendment, but I would like to move that we return to this provision at the end of the bill
to debate that issue.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I was referring previously to the Prostitution Act 2000. I was looking at section 3, the
definitions section, which I believe is the section that is dealt with in clause 5 of the bill, “Section 3 amended”. I
was on the right section; it is just that I was looking at the act. The Attorney General is seeking to make a
change to the definition of “client” in the act so that the term “client” has the meaning it has under section 4. I
want to discuss the term “client”. Would the Attorney General like me to discuss it now, because the term
“client” comes under the definition in section 3, or would he prefer that we wait until section 4?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Can you put the question again?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I want to look at the definition of “client”. The Attorney General is seeking to amend
the definition of “client” in clause 5, “Section 3 amended”, by deleting the words “given to that term in” and
inserting instead “it has under”. I want to look at section 4 of the act, not the bill before us. Do we need to
discuss the definition of “client” now? I believe that we do; in fact, I am almost certain that we do. The term
“client” will have the meaning it has under section 4, whereas previously -
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr M.J. Cowper): The member has confused me. The question is that the words
to be inserted be inserted. We are dealing with an amendment that appears on the notice paper. Does the
member wish to raise a particular issue under this clause? We are dealing right now with the amendment moved
by the Attorney General.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I am looking at the definition of “client” in section 3, because that is what we are
dealing with now. The clause refers to the term “client”. I am looking at section 4 of the act. That is where the
definition of “client” is referred to.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I can understand the confusion of the member for Alfred Cove. We are dealing with the
Attorney General’s amendment to line 14 on page 3 of the bill, which refers to deleting the definitions of “act as
a prostitute”, “prostitute” and “prostitution”. The member for Alfred Cove is trying to establish that members
6162                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

have some questions about provisions before that line of the bill. We have some questions about clause 5(1)(a)
and (b). I suppose the member is trying to get some indication whether -
Mr J.A. McGinty: She needs to raise it now, in my view.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Absolutely, but we are not dealing with that. We are dealing with the Attorney General’s
amendment to line 14 on page 3 of the bill. That is the question before the house at the moment. I think the
Attorney General was a bit quick off the mark in moving that amendment. He should have waited a while.
Mr J.A. McGinty: I did look around to see whether anybody else wanted the call.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I was going to get up, but the Attorney General got up.
Ms S.E. Walker: We were not expecting you to get up, Attorney General.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: We are so unused to the Attorney General getting up in the house during debate on this
bill that it came as an absolute shock! We are still suffering from it. I was going to rise because I wanted to ask
a similar question to that of the member for Alfred Cove. We need to deal with clause 5(1)(a) and (b) before we
get to paragraph (c), which is the part the Attorney General’s amendment seeks to amend. I do not believe we
can go back if we are dealing with an amendment before the house. I would like some clarification from the
Chair on where we stand on that matter. I do not want members on this side of the house to be castigated
because they are talking about a matter that is not before the house at this time. I have a problem with the word
“client”, and I know that other members on this side of the house also have a problem with it. I also want to ask
some questions about the definition of “public place”.
The ACTING SPEAKER: I might be able to clarify the matter for the member. There will be an opportunity
for the member to speak after we have dealt with the amendment before the house. The question is that the
words to be inserted be inserted. Whether that is agreed to or not agreed to, the question then will be that clause
5 stand as printed, which will give the member an opportunity to speak to clause 5(1)(a).
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: That is not a problem. That is fine. We are now talking about the Attorney General’s
amendment to clause 5(1)(c). According to page 2 of the blue bill, the definition of “act of prostitution” in
section 3 of the act will be removed. That is the part that will be taken out completely; it deletes that, does it
not?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The Attorney General wants to insert after “act as a prostitute” the words “act of
prostitution”. As far as I can see, the Attorney General is amending the act. Under the bill that is before the
house the amendment to the act in clause 5(1)(c) will delete the definitions of “act as a prostitute”, “prostitute”
and “prostitution”. Will the amendment then insert “act of prostitution” or take it away, because it is not already
there in the bill?
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr M.J. Cowper): My understanding is that it is an addition.
Mr J.A. McGinty: The bill currently proposes to delete three definitions: “act as a prostitute”, “prostitute” and
“prostitution”.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Yes.
Mr J.A. McGinty: What we should have done and what this amendment seeks to do is delete four definitions.
The fourth definition is “act of prostitution”. Therefore, if this amendment is carried, each of these four
definitions will be deleted from the Prostitution Act.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Once again every skerrick of “prostitute” or “prostitution” will be deleted from this bill.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Is that the Attorney General’s ultimate aim in life?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Consistency of terminology.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Yes, that is what the Attorney General says. We say something very different, obviously,
so we will not be agreeing to this amendment.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I will not be agreeing to this amendment. The reason is that I do not agree at all with the
Attorney General deleting these words. I will take members through the amendment. I disagree with the
member for Hillarys about the sort of issue we are dealing with here. Some people believe this is a moral and
ethical issue. I believe that is too judgemental. It is judgemental on women who find themselves in extreme
circumstances and who believe they have no other option but to turn to prostitution.
Mr R.F. Johnson: I actually said it was a moral and legal issue.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Yes.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                       6163

In my view, therefore, it is a women’s abuse issue, as the member for Alfred Cove said; it is an equal
opportunity issue; and it is a violence against women issue. It is really important that we recognise that. I do not
want to be seen to be putting any value judgement on it. I will come in a moment to the amendment to delete
“act of prostitution”. It has been interesting to see in this house when we have had conscience votes how
members can be very strong on one moral aspect and completely different on another. I will therefore remain
neutral on this amendment, as women can find themselves in terrible positions, and single mothers are one of the
biggest poverty groups in this country. Having said that, when we consider the definitions of “act as a
prostitute” and “act of prostitution” in the Prostitution Act 2000, which are two of the four definitions that the
Attorney wants to delete, it is important to understand what he is doing in this amendment, as it relates to the
different way in which the Attorney General treats two or more people who engage in an act of prostitution.
Under the Prostitution Act, the phrase “to act as a prostitute”, which the Attorney General wants to delete, means
to take part as a prostitute in an act of prostitution. The phrase “act of prostitution”, which the Attorney General
wants to insert into the bill for deletion from the act, means any act the doing of which amounts to prostitution.
In the current Prostitution Act, prostitution means under section 4 -
         When this Act refers to prostitution it means prostitution in which payment is consideration for sexual
         stimulation of a person (“the client”) by means of physical contact between the client and another
         person (“the prostitute”), or between either of them and anything controlled by or emanating from the
         other . . .
My point is that an act of prostitution requires someone to be sexually stimulated by another person. However,
the Attorney General wants to delete the term “prostitute”. That is what he is doing with this amendment. He
will delete the phrases “act of prostitution” and “act as a prostitute” and down the track insert “sex worker” for
“prostitute”. However, he will not change the word “client”, although they both engage in an act of prostitution.
In the same clause he wants to insert “acts as a sex worker”, which means to take part, as a sex worker, in a
commercial sexual act. Why does the Attorney General not call them both sex workers? Why does he give the
person who is sexually stimulated the respectable title “client”, yet he uses a derogatory and explicit term for the
person who is paid? That is why I will not vote for this amendment; it is discriminatory. I will plough through
the Equal Opportunity Act and I am sure I will come up with something. That is why I will vote against this
amendment. I do not believe overall that this amendment by the Attorney General is appropriate for Western
Australian women; it is discriminatory. The removal of these definitions from the Prostitution Act will
stigmatise people. I will not support the amendment.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: This amendment is classic Goebbels-speak. Joseph Goebbels put a “Work Camp”
sign above the gate at Auschwitz.
An opposition member interjected.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: He put a “Work Camp” sign above the gate at Auschwitz. The sign went on to say
something like in work there is freedom.
Mr J.H.D. Day interjected.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: “Work makes you free”; I thank the member for Darling Range for that. I had
forgotten that. However, Joseph Goebbels spent a lot of time reinventing words for events that had been
occurring for a couple of hundred years so that people could put a spin on them to make them look different.
This amendment, Attorney General, is nothing but spin. Where else in the world will this law make any sense?
I have looked up the Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary, which describes “prostitute”. Does the Attorney
General know what it says about “sex worker”? It is not in there. Does the Attorney General know what it says
about the other amazing term - “individual sex worker” - which will come up in a minute? No, because it is not
in there. “Prostitute” is in there. The description that the Attorney General is attempting to insert in this bill for
“sex worker” is actually the description for “prostitute”. Funny about that, is it not? This amendment is
therefore real, first-class Goebbels-speak and should not be put in any other context. I wonder whether the
Attorney General will make any alteration to clause 4, as “Prostitution” will be in the bill unless he changes the
title. The Attorney General might have to apologise to the member who asked that question.
Mr J.A. McGinty: I think by the time we are finished it won’t be.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Does the Attorney General have another amendment coming up?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Most probably. Can I answer your other question? The definition of “sex worker” in the
New Zealand Prostitution Reform Act - it has kept the word “prostitution” - is a person who provides
commercial sexual services.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: That is the definition of a prostitute?
Mr J.A. McGinty: As a sex worker, yes.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Only the Attorney General and a lunatic in New Zealand decided to do the same
thing! The rest of the world calls that person a prostitute.
6164                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Mr J.A. McGinty: New Zealand seems to have kept the words “brothels” and “prostitutes” but it also refers to
“sex workers”. There seems to be an interesting mix. It also has “client” in its definition section.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: We will get down to discussing this a little later in the bill, as this is probably not
the appropriate moment. The definition of “prostitute” in the Australian Pocket Oxford Dictionary reads -
         . . . a woman or girl who engages in sexual activity for payment.
Under clause 6 of this bill section 4 of the act is amended by deleting the word “prostitute” and inserting the
words “sex worker”. Reference is made to a prostitute and it is irrelevant whether payment is in money or any
other form. What does that mean in terms of a woman and a man and an act? If a woman at a pub goes home
with a man and stays overnight, is she a prostitute?
Mr J.A. McGinty: I do not think so.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: She is. Tell me why she is not. I will raise this issue again when we debate
clause 6.
The point I am trying to make is that it is nonsense to say that by striking out one English word and replacing it
with other words, the world has changed. Nothing will change because to the general population they will be
prostitutes. They will do all the things that prostitutes have always done. Why do we not call them prostitutes?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: As we are talking about terminology, under the Australian Standard Classification of
Occupations structure there is a definition of “prostitute” or “escort”. This structure covers elementary clerical,
sales and service workers. Does that structure apply to Western Australia and federally?
Mr J.A. McGinty: I do not know.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The terminology is being changed in this bill but it will not be consistent with general
terminology. I read an interesting report the other day on a review of police corruption in the eastern states. I
got my electorate officer to go through that report and look for the words “brothel” and “prostitute”. The
Attorney General said that one of the reasons for this bill is to deal with police corruption. While my electorate
officer could not find the words “brothel” or “prostitute”, she found the phrase “entertainment industry”. I am
looking at this clause and wondering whether “sex worker” means that people will be trafficked. I cannot get
away from trafficking, but it is happening. By deleting reference to “prostitute” in this bill perhaps sex workers
will be defined as entertainers. How far does this bill go with this definition? This bill does not provide any
support to prostitutes. I discussed with the Attorney General previously, before I became aware of trafficking
and abuse issues, that if we are to do something about prostitution, instead of legalising brothels we should be
registering prostitutes to give them power. I discussed that with several groups and they suggested that if that
were the case instead of the brothel owner being in charge, the government would become the pimp. Several
people were very unhappy with that concept.
I wonder what is going on with the definitions of “prostitution”, “entertainment” and “sex worker”. This bill is
being pushed through the house quickly and I, like many others, wonder what the Attorney General’s agenda is.
We know there will be an increase in drug use, trafficking and brothels in the suburbs. What else will arise out
of this bill? I am sure the Attorney General knows, and in six months we will all know because what is hidden
in the clauses of this bill will come to light.
I am unhappy with the Attorney General’s amendment. As soon as the amendments on this clause have been
moved I will come back to the meaning of these definitions. Prostitutes are not being given any power. The
clients, pimps, madams and the drug dealers will do well out of this bill, but the women who, by unfortunate
circumstances, have ended up working as prostitutes will get nothing. The result of this bill will be more people
employed in this industry.
Amendment put and a division taken with the following result -

                                                     Ayes (25)

Mr P.W. Andrews             Mr F.M. Logan                Mr P. Papalia                Mr D.A. Templeman
Dr J.M. Edwards             Mr J.A. McGinty              Mr J.R. Quigley              Mr P.B. Watson
Mrs D.J. Guise              Mr M. McGowan                Ms M.M. Quirk                Mr M.P. Whitely
Mrs J. Hughes               Ms S.M. McHale               Ms J.A. Radisich             Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)
Mr J.N. Hyde                Mr A.D. McRae                Mr E.S. Ripper
Mr J.C. Kobelke             Mrs C.A. Martin              Mrs M.H. Roberts
Mr R.C. Kucera              Mr M.P. Murray               Mr T.G. Stephens
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                            6165

                                                      Noes (19)

Mr C.J. Barnett              Mr J.H.D. Day                Mr P.D. Omodei                  Ms S.E. Walker
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan      Dr K.D. Hames                Mr G. Snook                     Mr G.A. Woodhams
Mr T.R. Buswell              Ms K. Hodson-Thomas          Dr S.C. Thomas                  Dr J.M. Woollard
Mr G.M. Castrilli            Dr G.G. Jacobs               Mr M.W. Trenorden               Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)
Dr E. Constable              Mr R.F. Johnson              Mr T.K. Waldron


                                                        Pairs

                             Mr A.J. Carpenter                                Mr T.R. Sprigg
                             Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan                             Mr M.J. Birney
                             Mr B.S. Wyatt                                    Mr J.E. McGrath

Amendment thus passed.
Mr C.J. Barnett: We’re pushing this through at breakneck speed!
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Absolutely! Here I am, trying to be cooperative on the bill before the house, and the
Attorney General is going at a speed of knots to try to ram the legislation through. I intend to have my say, as is
my right as a member of this house, and to represent my electorate and shadow portfolio areas.
We know that clause 5 is slightly different now because of the amendment moved by the Attorney General.
There is therefore not much point in talking to clause 5(1)(c); we have probably done that one to death.
However, there is no amendment to clause 5(1)(a) before the house. I would like the Attorney General to
explain in detail the significance of clause 5(1)(a).
Mr J.A. McGINTY: It is the preferred drafting style of parliamentary counsel. The old way of expressing a
reference made to another section or a definition section was to say that it had the meaning given to the term in
the other section. The contemporary way achieves exactly the same effect by replacing the words with “it has
under”; that is, it has the meaning it has under section such-and-such. It is simply the drafting preference
currently favoured by parliamentary counsel for the reference to the other section to mean what it does under that
section. The old way, which has been replaced, has the meaning given to the term in the other section. There is
absolutely nothing of any significance, other than drafting style, coming from that.
Mr R.F. Johnson: Can I trust you on that?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: As much as the member can on anything!
Mr R.F. Johnson: Struth! I’ll never get up again!
Ms S.E. WALKER: It is strange. The Attorney General has claimed that he will modernise this bill and
modernise the terminology. He has said that we are going to get rid of this antiquated legislation, yet here he is
bringing in antiquated legislation. Perhaps we should have said something about that when we debated the title.
I have an amendment to clause 5 on the notice paper; I will come to that later. I want to talk about clause 5; it is
important because it is very discriminatory. The Attorney General’s amendment to clause 5(1)(c) deleted the
word “prostitute”. Different definitions have been inserted, using the new terminology of “sex worker”. The
new definition occurs under clause 5(2), which states in part -
          “act as a sex worker” means to take part, as a sex worker, in a commercial sexual act . . .
Further down the page, the clause states -
          “commercial sexual act” has the meaning it has under section 4 . . .
That is, section 4 of the Prostitution Act. That is when we come back to the definition of “prostitution”, because
we are going to change the term “prostitution” to “commercial sexual act”. The member for Avon has talked
about what prostitution means. It will not mean anything different; it will have a different name; or rather, some
parties to the act will have a different name. The member for Avon said that all one has to do in order to be a
prostitute is to go home with someone for the night and say, “I’ll have sex with you if you keep me out of the
rain for the night.” I am using the example that the member for Avon and I were talking about during the break.
Payment does not have to be monetary; it can be payment in any other form. The client might say, “I don’t have
any money, but I can give you a roof over your head for the night.” The Attorney General has not changed that,
because he has not thought this bill through. Knowing the member for Perth and the other members of his
committee, I do not think they have thought it through, either. This is not about the prostitute or about Sue
Ellery or Giz Watson thinking about the women of this state; it is about supporting brothel owners and ensuring
that brothel owners will gather all the individual prostitutes and thereby control the industry.
It is a change from prostitution to a commercial sexual act. The person giving the sexual stimulation to the other
person will no longer be called a prostitute; she will, under clause 5(2), be called a sex worker. However, the
client - the person who receives the sex act - will still be called the client. That is where my amendment comes
6166                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

in. My amendment will be to ascribe to the phrase “sex worker user” the meaning given to it under section 4.
When the house considers clause 6, I will move to substitute the word “client” with “sex worker user”. Why will
I do that? I will do that because I am the shadow Attorney General and I am thinking about discrimination and
how we can modernise this bill. The Attorney General has just come back from France - he does not look as
though he is very refreshed. I thought he would come back, look at this legislation, and put his modernising hat
back on. Why has the member for Girrawheen, for instance, not come forward and asked why we are not
looking after women?
Ms M.M. Quirk: Because I’m not an expert on prostitution.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Not a word! What about women? Why has the member not spoken about women? She
has not; she has just sat there. The government has just sat there and kept shtum on women, except for the
member for -
Mr J.A. McGinty: How do you spell that, for Hansard?
Ms S.E. WALKER: S-H-T-U-M? I do not know! I am always helping the Attorney General out!
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: It is interesting to look at what the member for Nedlands intends to do with this clause
in combination with what the Attorney General wants to do with section 4 of the current act. The member for
Nedlands is actually trying to give it more clarification. Personally, I would prefer “sex worker user and abuser”
rather than just “sex worker user”, but that is because I cannot help looking at this bill from a woman’s
perspective and thinking about women’s rights and the trafficking that is occurring, which the Attorney General
is just not interested in. I think her amendment might be of use. I would still like the Liberal opposition, if it
wins the next election, to throw out this legislation.
Ms S.E. Walker interjected.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Maybe the member for Nedlands should be moving nearer to the front benches and
into a leadership role if she is going to do something like that, because I think that is what we need, or certainly
what the Liberal Party needs. I think it needs a woman leader. I actually think the member for Nedlands would
be very good. A lot of other women might then be interested in joining the Liberal Party. I do not think the
Attorney General was in the chamber earlier when I mentioned the day he missed the second reading debate. I
know he did not miss all of the days, but he missed the day when I gave my speech. I went to the briefing given
by the woman from Sweden and found it interesting. I asked her the relative percentage of male and female
members when the Swedish model was passed through the Swedish Parliament. She said that 47 per cent were
female.
Mr J.A. McGinty: In the Swedish Parliament?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Yes. It is disappointing that there are so few women in this Parliament. If there were
more women and if this Parliament was not such a boys’ club, we would not have this legislation before us. I
think the Deputy Speaker does a wonderful job. I would like to see a lot more women in those positions. When
I have discussed this prostitution issue with certain groups, I have insisted on them being women-only meetings.
We have had one male representing the male prostitution industry. This is a women’s issue. I quite like what
the member for Nedlands is intending to do because it really fits in with the Swedish model, which I think has a
lot of merit. It fits in more with the statements that have been made about prostitution and trafficking by the
United Nations and the United States.
I am very disappointed that this bill is being rushed through the house so quickly. There are many people in the
community who are very disappointed with this government. I know they will be very disappointed with the
Greens (WA) if they support this bill in the upper house. Hon Giz Watson said that she would reconsider her
support for the bill if I could give her the evidence on trafficking. I can give her the evidence now. I worked
very hard to get that evidence. I am hoping that she will reconsider as she said she would.
Mr R.F. Johnson: I bet she won’t.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: She said that if I could give her evidence on trafficking, she would reconsider. I have
found the evidence in federal reports and, in relation to what is happening here in Western Australia, in
statements that police officers have made. I am very pleased that the member for Nedlands will not just allow it
all to go the way of the client, who is the abuser, and look at these -
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I move -
         Page 4, line 11 - To delete “individual sex worker” and substitute in correct alphabetical order -
                  prostitute
I have not moved this amendment for a frivolous reason. My argument with the bill is that sex workers are
created. That is why I voted for the title of the act. The bill creates brothels. There will be sex workers and
managers inside brothels and they will become a legal entity. It is very hard for the Attorney General or anyone
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                       6167

else to argue differently as the text shows what is going to happen - there will be a sex industry. When two
women operate out of a house down the road with no police involvement - the only involvement will be from
local government in terms of planning - they will actually be prostitutes in the real definition of the word. I will
read the definition again just so that the Attorney General understands where I am coming from. The definition
of a prostitute is a woman or girl who engages in sexual activity for payment.
Down the road in suburbia and in every small country town will be a house with one or two women acting as
prostitutes. I do not say this lightly because it is not easy for me to say this. I love my community in Northam
but there is a range of women in my town who are under pressure. They are under pressure for a raft of reasons,
including drugs and mental disabilities. Some believe that they have been persecuted by men, life, work or
whatever. They will now have the opportunity to start operating as a prostitute in downtown Northam, Dowerin
or any other country town. They will have the opportunity to pull in a few hundred dollars for their drug or
alcohol habit or for their boyfriend. The pressures of society will no longer be there. These prostitutes will not
be visited by a Catholic minister or an Anglican minister and be asked whether they have thought about what
they are doing with their lives. They will not be visited by someone from the old DCD saying, “Look at what
you are doing. Have you thought about what this is going to do to your life?” They will start operating as
prostitutes. The only opportunity there will be to talk to those women is if local government says they have to
stop operating in that house. Everybody knows how difficult it is in a country town - I presume it is the same in
the city - to have someone evicted from a house. It takes six months or more. The reality is that all these women
have to do is find the next rentable house, move in and start operating again. The police cannot act. The social
welfare people cannot act. It is no longer the responsibility of the local community to counsel those people.
Those people will be out by themselves. I genuinely say to the minister that this is a recipe for disaster. Those
people will not be able to seek any counselling or go through any processes in my community.
People are not in any way invisible in the towns of Northam, Dowerin or Moora, whether they are down the
street or somewhere else in the town or playing golf or tennis. If a woman is a prostitute, she will not be
invisible. Whether or not the Attorney General wants to believe it, we are venturing into a brand-new unbrave
world. I actually have great concern for my community. There are more than 140 kids at risk in my community.
There is a raft of social problems in my community, which I despair over. I do not need another reason to
despair. The only thing we can do about this problem is use the stigma of the word “prostitute”.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I will support the member for Avon on this amendment, and not because I do not
understand the reasoning for it. I understand what he was saying, but the word stigmatises women who do this
as prostitutes. I will take the member for Avon through something that I do not think he really understands. I
am not sure that the Attorney General understands this either. The definition that the member wants to change is
quite pivotal to what this bill is all about. This bill is about routing out those women who operate on their own at
the moment. I will take the Attorney General through this, because I do not think he understands what is behind
it. At the moment, as I understand it, some women operate at home, and nobody knows about it. They just do it,
but if somebody does know about it and complains, these women are dealt with. We know now what is behind
this bill, because the member for Perth gave us the clue when he had a tantrum early on. When he realised that
he had said what the motive behind this bill was, he did not come into the chamber for a few days. He came in
today, and made a bit of a fool of himself, and realised that he had to stay out of the chamber. I picked up what
he said. Clause 5(2) reads, in part -
         “individual sex worker” means a person who solely owns and carries on a sexual service business -
For the first time, that person who does not have to have a home licence and whose home is not called a brothel,
will have to get a brothel licence. I will take the Attorney General through the provisions in a moment. Is the
adviser saying yes or no?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Just develop your argument. I do not think you are right.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I think I am right, but if I am wrong, I would be very pleased to hear it. The member for
Perth came out in a fit of pique and said -
         . . . with a home licence, if they’re not registered as a brothel, for the very first time, local government
         will be able to take a case into the courts and get them eliminated - get them dealt with. They can’t do
         it at the moment. Under this legislation, for the first time, they will.
If a woman working from home does not make an application for and obtain a brothel licence, she will not be
able to operate from home. I will take the Attorney General through the provisions. An individual sex worker is
defined as a person who solely owns and carries on a sexual service business. Further on, the clause states -
         “sexual service business” means the business of providing, or arranging the provision of, a commercial
                 sexual act;
Further on, the clause states -
6168                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

         “small owner-operated business” means a sexual service business -
                  (a)       in which not more than 2 sex workers work;
In my view, that means that an individual sex worker or a sex worker in a sexual service business will have to
get an operator’s licence. Another definition in the clause states -
         “operate”, in relation to a sexual service business, means -
                  (a)       whether alone or with others, own, operate or carry on the sexual service business . . .
We have it straight from the horse’s mouth - that is, from the member for Perth - that the government is gunning
for those people who take away business from the brothels. When the member for Roe said there would be
nobody in the brothels, I said that the brothels would be full, because the women who now operate quietly in the
suburbs will have to apply to the director general for a licence. Then they will have to work out with local
government whether they will be able to operate. They will be tagged. They will be recorded as operating home
businesses, and if they do not have licences, as the member for Perth says, they will be hunted down. Local
government will be able to take a case to the State Administrative Tribunal, and get them, on behalf of the
brothel owners. That is what will happen, and I would like the Attorney General to have a look at that. He is
punishing those women, and the women on the government side of the house are allowing that to happen. They
have not even looked at the legislation.
Mr C.J. BARNETT: I would like to hear more from the member for Nedlands, because I think this is a serious
part of the bill. Part of the exploitation of women may be intimidation of people who run small prostitution
businesses from their homes. That is the area in which organised crime is most likely to become involved. The
Attorney General looks worried, if not confused.
Ms S.E. WALKER: In the definitions, “small owner-operated business” means a sexual service business in
which not more than two sex workers work. One or two sex workers can be defined under this bill as a small
owner-operated business. It is a sexual service business, which means the business of providing, or arranging
the provision of, a commercial sexual act. “Operate”, in relation to a sexual service business, means to carry on
a sexual service business. I went through this in my second reading contribution. From what the member for
Perth has said, such a person must apply for a licence to operate. I do not even know why this provision is
included in the bill. If the Attorney General is not proposing that such businesses should apply for licences, why
are they included in the bill? Why are they defined in any way at all? The Attorney General can put it on
record. Is he saying that women who now act on their own, and act anonymously and discreetly in the
community, will have to apply for licences? I am not saying that I agree with it; I do not know why they do it.
They do it for a variety of reasons. As I said, I will not be judgemental. I am concerned about the brothel
owners and people who live off prostitution. The Attorney General is saying that this bill will continue to allow
them to operate without having to apply for an operator’s licence. “Operator” means a person who holds an
operator’s certificate. Tracking it back, it means that those women will have to get a certificate. If the Attorney
General can confirm that it is not so, I will be happy, because that is not the way the member for Perth said it.
He said -
         . . . with a home licence, if they’re not registered as a brothel . . . local government will be able to take a
         case into the courts and get them eliminated - get them dealt with.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I think the answer to the question that was raised by the member for Nedlands is to be
found on page 14 of the bill, in proposed section 21B(3). Essentially, this exempts a small owner-operated
business or an individual sex worker from the requirement to have a certificate. When the member referred to a
licence, I presume that is what she was referring to. There are most probably three important elements in this
argument. The first is that, under this bill, to operate a sexual service business - or a brothel in the old language -
people will need to have a certificate from the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor.
Ms S.E. Walker: After this bill is passed, will they have to get a home licence?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: In respect of a certificate from the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor to operate a
sexual service business, they will not. That is because of the proposed section to which I just referred the
member. The second issue is that they will need local government approval to operate a home business, in the
same way that planning law relates to the operation of a home business.
Ms S.E. Walker: Don’t they have to do that now?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Technically, yes.
Ms S.E. Walker: Do they have to?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Technically they do, but they do not.
Ms S.E. Walker: Why not?
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                        6169

Mr J.A. McGINTY: I do not know.
Ms S.E. Walker: Are we prosecuting them for not doing it?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am not aware of anyone being prosecuted for that reason.
Ms S.E. Walker: The member for Perth says that they will be hunted down. Well, he didn’t say “hunted
down”, but in effect that is what he is saying.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Putting the whole of the sex industry into a different framework that requires sexual
services businesses to be certificated as a precondition to operate legally will add greater strength to the ability of
local government to control the one and two-person businesses.
Ms S.E. Walker: But can I just -
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will finish answering the member’s question. The first issue is that a person does not
need a certificate if the person is a small business operator, which is the one or two-person type of operation.
That is the clause to which I have just referred. The second issue is local government approval. The larger
businesses and the smaller owner-operators will be required to get local government approval. This is no
different from the requirement for any other home business under the local government planning arrangements
that is required to be licensed. It will be treated on the same basis as someone who runs a secretarial business or
any other business from home.
Ms S.E. Walker: Where is the amendment to the Local Government Act for that?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: It is not necessary.
Ms S.E. Walker: What you will do is actually start prosecuting people who are running a business for sexual
services from home more vigorously than you would have done before.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am talking about what is a legal requirement. There are three of them. The first is a
certificate, which does not include the small owner-operator.
Ms S.E. Walker: I understand that.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: The second is local government approval. If local governments require a home business
to be approved, this type of business will be treated in the same way as any other business.
Ms S.E. Walker: But they don’t do that now though, do they?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will finish what I am describing. The third point is that there are some provisions,
particularly the health provisions and the protection of children provisions contained in later stages of this bill,
that will apply to individual operators or small businesses in the same way that they will apply to a brothel, to
use the old language. I refer the member to proposed section 21S, “Obligations of operators and managers”.
Certain requirements will apply to anyone engaged in the sex industry, but the certification requirement applies
only to the establishment that has more than two employees, or two workers. That is most probably the best way
I can answer the member’s question.
Mr C.J. BARNETT: I want to follow up on what the Attorney General was just saying. I think we understand
the point about the brothel and the requirement to get a licence from the department. Given that a small one or
two-person operation is required to get local government approval to run a business, will that not, in effect, be a
quasi-licence, albeit at local level? It is not a licence in the way members think about it. If those people are
required to get approval, they will be identified. As the member for Nedlands has said, their anonymity will be
lost; they will be identified. If a licensed brothel did not want a small operator in business, it might encourage or
even orchestrate complaints to make public the name of that single operator.
Mr J.A. McGinty: I think that is feasible.
Mr C.J. BARNETT: I think it is highly likely. Will this not play into the hands of larger brothels that want to
intimidate, threaten, bully or force out of business those home operators? The Attorney General is putting these
women at risk. It is not just a commercial risk; they will potentially be put in danger because the government
will force them to seek a form of approval that is essentially a quasi-licence. It exposes them.
Mr J.N. Hyde interjected.
Mr C.J. BARNETT: Go away! Go back to Thailand again. An interjection from Thailand. We do not need
that; it is a long way away.
I am making a serious point. That might not be the government’s intention, but the member for Nedlands has
raised the fact that it would place small or single operators at risk. It would put them into the limelight and allow
the licensed brothels to pursue them and force them out of business.
6170                              [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Ms S.E. WALKER: This bill allows the most vile form of bullying and threatening behaviour. It is a sinister
bill. As I have said, it is a bill about brothels and about enhancing the power of brothels. As the member for
Perth says, it will eliminate the women who work anonymously. Right now we do not know who they are.
Mr J.N. Hyde: I have never said that. It is about decriminalisation. You are verballing me. Shame on you!
Ms S.E. WALKER: I will look at the tape. I have done it before with the member when he said that McCusker
wrote his speech. I went to the Hansard then and I will do it again. I remember what the member said. It is in
the blues. I will see if the member has taken it out.
Mr J.N. Hyde: You are floundering again.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I am not floundering. The member for Perth is trying to make these women flounder, and
I will stand up for them. The only reason the member for Perth is in here now is that he has made promises, has
he not? He made promises that he would get legislation through and he will look pretty embarrassed if it does
not get through. The member for Perth cannot control himself. He came in here and responded to the member
for Avon and said that he would eliminate these people.
Mr J.N. Hyde interjected.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The member said “pursue them”. That is how he has set up this legislation. Attorney
General, it makes no difference whether it will be called a brothel licence or a home licence. The Attorney
General wants to identify the women as he tried to do when the member for Midland brought in the crazy bill to
license these women. That bill was whisked out that week and then brought back. This is the same thing. The
Attorney General is creating a disincentive for these women to carry on their business.
Mr J.N. Hyde: Have you consulted them? No.
Ms S.E. WALKER: It is a disincentive for them to carry on their business.
Mr J.N. Hyde interjected.
Ms S.E. WALKER: That is not what the member for Perth said. He said that local government would be able
to take a case to court and get them eliminated and dealt with. Threats! Threats! Threats!
Mr J.N. Hyde: With problem places, where there is more than one operator.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The member wants to drive them into the brothels.
Mr J.N. Hyde: You are not reading; you are verballing. You should be protecting women, not attacking them.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The member for Perth is an abomination to come in here and say this legislation is about
protecting women. He does not care about women. He cares about doing favours for people he knows in the
brothel industry. He thinks that he is a pretty good guy by bringing in this legislation. I do not.
Mr J.N. Hyde: This is good social policy
Ms S.E. WALKER: The fact that the Attorney General has not got the character or the gumption to deal with
this legislation is a reflection on him.
Mr J.A. McGinty: I thought I was dealing with it.
Ms S.E. WALKER: That is not even funny.
Mr J.N. Hyde: Why don’t you do some research?
Ms S.E. WALKER: I would hate to be a woman in the member for Perth’s electorate. He knows where they all
are. I bet he has already sussed them all out.
Mr J.N. Hyde: They talk because they are real people with real families and mortgages. They are real people
who are trying to earn a living and are dealing with life, and you want to attack them. You do not want to give
the workers protection. You don’t want to treat people equally.
Mr R.F. Johnson: How many prostitutes have you spoken to, member for Perth?
Ms S.E. WALKER: It is the number of brothel owners he has spoken to that worries me.
Mr R.F. Johnson: Tell us the truth. How many have you spoken to?
Ms S.E. WALKER: Excuse me, I am on my feet. There will be a more vigorous pursuit and prosecution of
women who do not take out a home licence. If they do not take out a home licence and they want to work in the
industry, they will have to work in a brothel. The member for Roe says that the brothels will be empty. I say
that they will be full because this legislation is designed to get rid of those women who want to work from home.
Mr R.F. Johnson: It is organised crime.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                    6171

Ms S.E. WALKER: It is. It is organised crime and it is an organised crime bill. It is about the brothel industry
and shoring up its power bases and kingdoms and getting rid of its competition. The member for Perth actually
told us that it is about eliminating the home workers so that they will not get a home licence.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will just finish the point I was making in response to the member for Cottesloe. A home
operator is currently required to apply to the local government authority for development approval to conduct a
home business, although this requirement is observed in the breach.
Mr C.J. Barnett: How many do?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Sure. I said it was honoured in the breach. Nonetheless, that is the law at the moment.
Mr P.D. Omodei: Do you mean home occupation?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes.
Mr P.D. Omodei: How many do that?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Because of the potentially illegal nature of what is going on, it is never done. However,
that does not affect the obligation on women who run sexual service businesses from home. They are under the
same obligation as anyone else who runs a business from home to make a development application to the local
government authority to run that business from home.
Mr C.J. Barnett: In reality, a woman might not want to be identified. Her husband, her family or her kids
might not know that she is working as a prostitute. There could be all sorts of reasons that she would not go to a
public institution like a local government authority.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: At the moment, she would be in breach of the law.
Mr C.J. Barnett: She might well be.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: We are not touching that in this legislation.
Mr C.J. Barnett: I think you are.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I understand the point that the member for Cottesloe is making. We are perhaps touching
it in the sense that we are setting up a new framework within which sexual services will be regulated. I concede
that this could have a repercussive effect on small operators.
Mr P.D. Omodei: Paradise for organised crime.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: It is a current legal requirement.
Ms S.E. Walker: Attorney General, that argument doesn’t wash.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Can I just finish making this point?
Ms S.E. Walker: It is a crime to operate a brothel.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, members!
Mr J.A. McGINTY: The only provision in this legislation that affects the local government planning process is
proposed section 21Y, which simply directs that if a development application under the Planning and
Development Act is made for either a large or a small owner-operated sexual service business, the local
government authority would need to take into account certain things in considering the matter.
Mr P.D. Omodei: State planning policy for a start.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: It would certainly include that.
Mr P.D. Omodei: Which means that the State Administrative Tribunal would overrule them every time.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Maybe and maybe not. Proposed section 21Y(1) outlines that when a development
application is made for a sexual service business to a local government authority, the local government authority
must -
         (a)      consider the application as if that purpose is a use that is not permitted unless the responsible
                  authority has exercised its discretion by granting planning approval; and
         (b)      in exercising its discretion, also have regard to whether the business -
                  (i)      is likely to cause a nuisance to ordinary members of the public using the area in which
                           the land is situated; and
                  (ii)     is incompatible with the existing character or use of the area in which the land is
                           situated.
6172                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

They are traditional planning issues that will need to be considered by the local government authority. Apart
from that, a small owner-operator is currently required to obtain planning approval from the local government
authority. If such operators do not do that - my understanding is that these people by and large disobey the law -
they will be in no different position once the legislation is passed. From a public policy perspective -
Mr C.J. Barnett: Other than the fact that their competitors - the brothels - will now be legal. They will have a
legal right on their side to raise the ante and take on the little owner-operators.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: That is a possibility. From time to time constituents raise with us the issue of prostitutes
who are operating from premises. At the moment, because of the illegal nature of prostitution, there is no
capacity for local governments to effectively control what goes on. Although the new framework will not
change the requirement for a development application to be made, it will provide local government with the
capacity to control those nuisances in a way that has not been practically available before. That is my belief of
the effectiveness of this legislation.
Mr R.F. Johnson: In what way?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I have just explained that.
Mr R.F. Johnson: I don’t think you have.
Ms S.E. Walker: No, you haven’t.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: If a nuisance occurs at the moment, evidence is needed of what transpires in the premises.
It all happens behind closed doors. Prostitution is not being regulated at the moment because of the illegal
aspects of living off the earnings of prostitution and managing premises for the purposes of prostitution, which
are Criminal Code offences. By repealing those offences and setting up a regulatory regime, I think we will give
local governments the power to control those nuisances.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Members, I allowed the debate to stray but I think it is now time to come back to
the point. I have an amendment before me that was moved by the member for Avon. The amendment is quite
specific. We need to come back to the amendment. Members can pick up the other debate in later debate on the
clause.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I read the bill differently from the member for Nedlands. What the minister has just
described will not work in rural towns.
Mr J.A. McGinty: It is not currently working in the city either.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I will describe what I think will happen in regional Western Australia. I cannot talk
about the city because I do not live in the city. If someone decided to set up a one or two-person operation in
downtown Northam and did not apply for planning approval, the local government would go through a legal
process to remove that person from the house in which she was operating, which is a long and arduous process,
as the minister knows. It would take months to move that person out of the house. However, if some other
person, such as me, decided to rent another house to that woman, the whole process would start again. There is
no penalty for that under the Local Government Act. At least if women act in that way at the moment in a
regional community, a range of things will happen. I think the minister understands that this happens. Such
women will be visited by welfare officers, who will turn up and say, “You’re in this house and you’ve got
children. We don’t believe that what you are doing is appropriate.” In such instances, those women are put
under some pressure. I could name a number of women who have been fronted by welfare officers in recent
times in my electorate because too many men have been going into their homes when they have children in their
homes, and they were not prostitutes. The welfare agencies said that what they were doing was inappropriate.
They can currently do that. However, this legislation will allow prostitution to occur even though there are
children in the house, because that will not come under a certificated process. That is what I am trying to argue
with the member for Nedlands. That will not happen. If someone runs a secretarial service in the Town of
Northam, that person is allowed to have two kids in the house. If this form of prostitution is allowed to operate,
the operators will be allowed to have two kids in the house.
Mr J.A. McGinty: No.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: How will it work? Who will prosecute them?
Mr J.A. McGinty: There is a total prohibition on kids being associated in any way with prostitution.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: How will that be prosecuted? The police are being removed from the process. All
government agencies are being removed from the process. The only agency that will be left to deal with
individual sex operators will be local government. My local government will not be able to handle that.
Mr J.A. McGinty: But the police could.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: The police are being told -
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6173

Mr J.A. McGinty: Say there are kids in a place in which prostitution is taking place. I would expect the police
to investigate that and lay charges.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: However, they will not. This is a Pontius Pilate bill. The police will wash their
hands of prostitution. That is the whole point of the bill.
Dr E. Constable: The bill does not cover that.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes, it does.
Dr E. Constable: Not the way I read it. It only covers children in what we would call brothels.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I will give the minister a written guarantee of what will happen. People will not
bother applying for local government approval. Why would they bother? There will be no penalty if they do not
apply for local government approval. Even if they do apply for local government approval and the council does
not like what they are doing, what council would fight the application? Your council might, Madam Deputy
Speaker, because it has a few resources, but the Northam council does not have those resources; it would not
pursue a woman who runs a brothel on the streets of Northam because the reality in Northam is that there would
not be streams of men going in and out of the house - an occasional person would come and go. Local
government will look at that issue and say that it is just too hard. People will ring the police and the police will
say, “This legislation absolves us from any responsibility in the case of individual sex workers.”
Ms S.E. Walker: It is not illegal to be a prostitute under this bill. Why would they call the police for a local
government planning matter?
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Exactly. When an individual offers secretarial services outside the Local
Government Act, does the local government ring the police? Of course it does not. Will it ring the police under
these circumstances? Of course it will not. There is no reason for it to do so. If it were to ring the police, the
police would say that this bill absolves them from any responsibility for dealing with these acts.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I wish the debate to be drawn directly to the amendment before the house. It has
been moved by the member for Avon and is quite specific. If members then wish to go on to the next page and
continue this debate, that is fine. However, there is an amendment before the house that members are required to
debate, and it has been moved by the member for Avon. If the member for Bunbury is going to address himself
to that amendment, that will be fantastic. If he is not, I will put the question and we will move on, and then
members can come back to the clause. The question before the house is that the words to be deleted be deleted.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will talk to the amendment, obviously.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is very narrow. It is quite specific.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: However, it is the meaning in the bill before the house. The amendment that the member
for Avon has moved seeks to delete the term “individual sex worker” and substitute in correct alphabetical order
“prostitute”. The definition of “individual sex worker” in the bill, which is what part of the debate has been
about, with all due respect, states -
         . . . means a person who solely owns and carries on a sexual service business -
                  (a)      involving the provision of a commercial sexual act by that person only; and
                  (b)      where that person has full control over his or her individual earnings from taking part
                           in commercial sexual acts;
I understand the member for Avon’s concerns. I think the member is saying that we are in a way giving some
sort of legitimacy to somebody who acts as a prostitute. The Attorney General does not want to use the word
“prostitute”; he wants to use the term “individual sex worker”. The member for Avon wants the term to revert to
the true definition of what the individual person does and what that person should be classed as. Taking it a bit
further, who is an individual sex worker? The answer is that an individual sex worker is a prostitute.
Dr J.M. Woollard: An individual sex worker could be a pole dancer. People know what the term “prostitute”
means.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Exactly. That is quite a reasonable interjection. An individual sex worker could be a
pole dancer. We know that the federal Leader of the Labor Party is quite keen on pole dancers. He is renowned
for visiting pole dancers in America. However, a pole dancer could be called an individual sex worker. Some
people might say that there are sexual connotations to dancing on a pole. I have not tried it myself. I might go
home tonight and see whether it does any good.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Let’s not go there.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No; let us not go there. Some people might say that there is some sexual feeling,
gratification or -
6174                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Ms S.E. Walker: Sexual stimulation.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: - stimulation involved in pole dancing. That is not what this bill is about. It is not about
pole dancers, even though it could cover them. The member for Avon is 100 per cent justified in moving the
amendment to get the bill back to the true meaning of what an individual person does. The individual person is a
prostitute in the context of this bill. The person is not a pole dancer, a lap dancer or anything else that may have
sexual connotations. The person is someone who will prostitute himself or herself; in other words, allow his or
her body to be used -
Ms S.E. Walker: Some politicians prostitute themselves.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Who?
Ms S.E. Walker interjected.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I see what the member means. I thought she was talking about me for a minute.
The member for Avon was absolutely right in his comments. I know that the Attorney General does not want to
remove the terms “sex worker” and “sexual service business” and that he hates the word “prostitute” and wants
to legitimise the area. However, at the end of the day, he must be true to himself and he must be true to this
legislation. He can do that only if he agrees to the amendment moved by the member for Avon. It is the only
way he can legitimise the true meaning that he is trying to convey in this bill. I do not think he has any other
option but to agree to the amendment.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I do not agree with the amendment. What will be the effect of it?
Mr R.F. Johnson: It will give truth to the bill.
Ms S.E. WALKER: What is the truth? The truth is that we want to call this person a prostitute, but we do not
want to call the client a prostitute as well.
Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected.
Ms S.E. WALKER: No. I am saying that this bill is discriminatory. The member for Hillarys has said that he
wants it to revert to what the individual does and what term should be used. It is a derogatory term. It is a
stigma, but we do not want to stigmatise the people who get the sexual stimulation - the people who enjoy
themselves.
Mr R.F. Johnson: I do. That is why I quite like the Swedish system.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Why are we concerned about stigmatising these people? I will not do that. I will not agree
to that. I do not see that this amendment will have any effect on this, so I will not support the amendment. I am
sorry, member for Avon. I just do not see that it adds anything to the bill in any way.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Can I just go back over the process, Madam Chair, because I do not think you were
in the chair at the time? We have a precise process for a sex worker. A sex worker will live in a building that is
called a brothel, or it might be called something else these days. However, it will have a structure and a
certificate. People will have to apply for a certificate. Under this legislation, the people in that structure will be
sex workers. They will get workers’ compensation and holiday pay. Outside that process, there is someone
called an individual sex worker who will not have to apply for a certificate and, in reality, will not have to obey
any local government laws because the fact is that those laws are not enforceable. They are not enforceable for
craft workers or secretaries. These arguments have been going on for the 20 years that I have lived in the town
of Northam. I cannot remember a person being prosecuted under that section of the act. Why is that person any
different under this legislation? My argument, member for Nedlands, is that it might be able to be argued that
the person who is in the certified place is a sex worker, but nothing will change for the people out in the suburbs.
This bill will change absolutely nothing.
Mr J.A. McGinty: How will your amendment affect that?
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I am making the point that they are as they have always been. Single women are
advertising their services in the papers and on the Internet. They are doing that now. The Attorney General
must have heard that some brothel owners are very unhappy because those people have no overheads; they have
an easy operation. All they do is keep moving.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Okay, but how will your amendments, this one in particular, affect that? I do not think they
will.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I am saying to the Attorney General that this is Goebbels-speak. The Attorney
General is giving the title “individual sex worker” to a person whom this bill does not affect. The Attorney
General might have a legitimate argument to say that a sex worker employed in a building is a sex worker
because there is a structure under which that person works. I am saying that there is no structure in the suburbs.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                       6175

Mr J.A. McGinty: There may not be a structure, but there are certain legal requirements in the bill that apply to
this person.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Where?
Mr J.A. McGinty: I can give one in relation to children on the premises.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I am putting to the Attorney General that it is not able to be policed.
Mr J.A. McGinty: But a woman with a child running a prostitution business from home - to use the old
language - commits an offence if there is a kid there.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Is she committing an offence if she is doing it right now?
Mr R.F. Johnson: I don’t think she’s committing an offence at the moment.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I can tell the Attorney General that the answer is yes.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: When the sun comes up after this bill is passed, nothing will have changed. I would
bet that woman who the Attorney General describes as an individual sex worker is currently in the suburbs now.
I know that, because she is in my home town. I am sure that she is out in the suburbs now with no policemen or
local government person knocking on her door. What will change after this bill is passed? When the sun comes
up in the morning after this bill is passed, nothing will have changed. That is my point. That person is a
prostitute now and will be a prostitute after the passage of this bill because there is no legal structure in the bill
for an individual sex worker. The argument that local government will do something about prostitution is
wrong. I spent 10 years as a councillor in local government. In fact, many members of this chamber have spent
time in local government. They know that local government will not do anything about it, particularly if they
cannot ring a police officer and say, “Come and do something about this.” Even if the person is renting a house
one or two houses away and her kids are back at some other house, what will a local council do?
Mr G.M. Castrilli: How are you going to prove it?
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Exactly. Local councils will do nothing about it. That is my point. This bill has no
coverage over an individual sex worker. There is no enforcement component in the bill. What I am saying to
the Attorney General is that absolutely nothing will change, and that is an indictment on the bill.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I am sorry; I still do not understand the member for Avon’s reasoning. He said that he
does not mind that a person called a prostitute now in a brothel is renamed a sex worker, but he does mind if a
person who operates from home is renamed a sex worker.
Mr J.A. McGinty: That is the problem I have with the argument as well. I am sorry to agree with you.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I can usually get the Attorney General to agree with me to make some very sweeping
changes. He has been to France, he is relaxed and he might just actually withdraw this bill when he thinks about
it overnight.
Mrs M.H. Roberts interjected.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The member for Midland’s bill was stalled.
Mrs M.H. Roberts: It went through this house.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The point is that the member for Avon does not mind a prostitute in a brothel being
renamed a sex worker. He said that that is because they are what they have always been. The member for Avon
then said that an individual sex worker is as he or she is and has always been. Why does the member for Avon
therefore say that they must keep the name of “prostitute”? Is it his attitude? Do individual sex workers have to
be penalised because they do not have any overheads? The member for Avon said that they have no overheads
and that they do not have to do all the things that people in brothels have to do. The member for Avon appeared
to be defending brothel owners; that is how it came across to me. I do not like people having a go at women who
may be quietly doing this for a couple of years. I do not know. As I said, I am not making a judgement. I have
never had anyone in my electorate come to me, although I am sure there must be individual women or men -
Dr J.M. Woollard: Big business versus small business.
Ms S.E. WALKER: It is big business versus small business.
The member for Avon has not convinced me at all that there is any rational reason for keeping that appalling
discriminatory name for a woman who makes a contractual arrangement with another person for sexual services;
the other person is called a client while she - it is usually a she - is called a prostitute.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: What is the difference between client and prostitute and client and sex worker?
6176                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Ms S.E. WALKER: I would not mind if the member for Avon had talked about the discriminatory terminology
between men and women. I am not having a go at the member for Avon. However, either he or another member
said that it did not matter what they were called, when men go to the pub their terminology is all about her, not
about the guy who goes there and pays money for the sexual service. The Attorney General himself has not been
advised properly by his department or his advisers about his responsibilities under the Equal Opportunity Act.
Using different terminology in a way makes it better for a prostitute; she is still a sex worker. However, the
client is not a sex worker user, and that is the problem I have with the terminology. The member for Avon said
that he would agree to retain the term “individual sex worker”, as she has no overheads, she gets away with it,
she flits from here to there and makes money.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: What does it matter? I am not saying that that person has to be there, no matter what.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The member for Avon would ensure that she retained the tag of “prostitute”.
Mr M.W. Trenorden: I don’t want her to be operating.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The member for Avon does not want her to be operating; therefore, she must be punished
by keeping that tag. I will not be agreeing to that.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I quite liked the amendment proposed by the member for Nedlands that uses the terms
“sex worker” and “sex worker user”. Having listened to the member for Avon, I do not agree with the bill
containing “prostitute” in one part and “sex worker user” in another.
Mr J.A. McGinty: That is the problem I have with what is being put by him.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: There is no stigma attached to the word “prostitute” where I come from. I would like
to see more done to help prostitutes involved in the industry who are having problems and who want to get out of
the industry. This government should be doing more to help those people get out of the industry, such as is
being done in other states. Instead of bringing this bill to the table, the government should be tackling the issues
of abuse and trafficking that occur in the prostitution industry. However, the industry is prostitution. The
member for Avon wants to call them “prostitutes”. The member for Nedlands wants to call the clients “sex
worker users”. Perhaps the terms should be “prostitute” and “prostitute user and abuser” instead of “sex worker”
and “client”. I acknowledge that the bill should not contain different terminology in different parts; there should
be one term. However, I am unhappy with the term “sex worker”. It appears to me that the government is trying
to soften the approach to this area, yet there are some very serious problems in this area. This bill does not
address those serious problems. This bill says that the government will look at occupational health and safety
issues in the industry. How will it do that? These women will continue to be abused in many different ways. I
would like to see this whole bill thrown in the bin. I would like the Attorney General to start again. I would like
him to form a committee and I would like to be a member of that committee.
Ms S.E. Walker: So would I.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I would work very hard to make sure that we produced some legislation that would
benefit the community and those women who currently are subject to terrible abuse in their role working as
prostitutes. Suddenly giving new names - “sex worker” and “sex worker user” - will not take away the abuse
that is going on in that area. It will not stop the trafficking of women and children. I am not quite sure what this
bill is all about. It looks as though the Attorney General has done something, but I believe the community at
large will not be happy with what the Attorney General has done. I do not think government members are happy
with the Attorney General’s bill. I know they are very unhappy that this bill does not address women’s rights
and the abuse that currently occurs in the prostitution industry. They are not happy that this bill will allow both
legal and illegal brothels to operate and that that will result in more people going into the industry. I gave the
figures earlier on the amount of money people make from prostituting women. I am pleased that the bill refers to
individual sex workers but it does not give them any control.
As the member for Nedlands said, the individual sex worker is considered to be at a lower level than the client.
The focus should be on the prostitute, what it is to be a prostitute and what we can do to help those prostitutes
who want to get out of the industry. They might not all want to get out of that industry. Some might be in
control and not on drugs, but there are those who are not in control, are on drugs and want to get out of the
industry. They are the people we should be helping and this bill will not help them.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will not use my full five minutes. I want it on the record that I support the member for
Avon’s amendment and I understand his reasoning behind it. The Attorney General is in some ways trying to
take away the stigma from the word “prostitution”. I will give him the benefit of the doubt for doing that. I do
not mind if there is a stigma attached to the words “prostitution” and “prostitute” because they aptly describe the
act that takes place. I do not want any young girls in Western Australia to get into this industry simply because
the legislation refers to “individual sex worker”. It does not carry the same stigma that is attached to the words
“prostitution” and “prostitute”.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                       6177

It appears that the Attorney’s intention is to encourage young girls who are leaving school to go into this
business, which will be a legal business once this bill is passed by both houses of Parliament, because they will
be classed as “individual sex workers”. Let us be honest. The member for Avon referred to those young girls
who are coming up to 18 and cannot get a job. Unfortunately, they might not have the qualifications to get some
jobs, but one job they will certainly get is working as a prostitute. If this bill defines them as an “individual sex
worker”, these young girls will be encouraged to become just that. Perhaps two young girls will rent a house and
the only way they can earn money to pay the rent and buy food and clothing is to prostitute themselves. It
happens already, but we will see a proliferation of people working in this business because this legislation takes
away any barriers that might currently be in place to stop young girls, in particular, from going into that trade. It
is a massive disservice to young Western Australian girls. The age group I am talking about is 17, coming up to
18. Under this bill, the minute they turn 18 they will be able to sell their bodies to a dirty, deviant bloke who
wants to do depraved things to them. These young women will be affected not only then, but also for the rest of
their lives. Let us leave the stigma -
Ms S.E. Walker: Why have you not done it for those in brothels?
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have. I want to leave the words “prostitute” and “prostitution” in this bill. It is not the
sort of bill we can tidy up and tie a ribbon around to make people feel good.
Ms S.E. Walker: Why have there not been any amendments from you concerning the use of the word “client”?
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I am happy for any definition of “client” that members would like. They are the worst
people. If it was not for the clients or the toerags who encourage these women to have sex for money, there
would not be prostitutes. If we were to take away the clients or the disgraceful men who pay money to have sex
with these women, we would not have a problem. I am standing up for women and young girls in Western
Australia, not the blokes who want to spend $50 or $100 for a quick half-hour. It is disgraceful, immoral and
illegal.
The member for Avon’s amendment substitutes the word “prostitute” for the words “individual sex worker”. A
street walker is an individual sex worker, and that is illegal under this bill. A lot of prostitutes will not walk the
streets.
Mr J.A. McGinty: You have broken your promise. You have taken up your full five minutes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will not, because I will sit down before the five minutes is up, I promise. I never break
a promise.
A lot of young girls go into hotels and pick up men and take them to their homes to have sex for money. They
should be called prostitutes and not individual sex workers.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I ask the member for Avon, because he is suggesting we delete the words “individual
sex worker” and substitute the word “prostitute”, whether he has a problem with supporting the member for
Nedlands’ amendment; that is, to delete the word “prostitute” and substitute the words “prostitute users”?
Mr M.W. Trenorden: When you have finished I will explain my position. She is absolutely right. What I am
saying is that the stigma attached to the word “prostitution” is what is stopping some women from becoming
prostitutes.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I do not have a problem with the word “prostitute”. However, I have a problem with
the use of the word “client” in this bill. When I was a nurse patients were called “patients” and then they became
“clients” and we had to use that terminology. This legislation is moving towards using the word “client”. These
people are not clients. A lot of the people who are using these services are clients under one meaning of the
word, but this bill is not looking at the large number of these people. I gave the Attorney General statistics
earlier tonight that showed that 67 per cent of the women working in this industry are abused. This bill is trying
to suggest that the abuse is fine and does not cause any problems.
One of the quotes I gave today was from the United Nations. It said that if we take away the market, there will
not be so many users. It may have used the word “users” but in this instance we are referring to “prostitute
users”. Perhaps we could use the word “victims”, particularly to describe those women who are trafficked from
other countries. They are victims because they have to pay off their contracts. This bill refers to payment for
services and the contracts for these women are somewhere between $30 000 and $40 000. I put on the record
earlier that these women have to see 15 to 20 clients a day, six or seven days a week. Knowing what is
happening, why do we not acknowledge now that this bill is not right? Why does this legislation, which will be
damaging, have to be pushed through? The last piece of legislation similar to this that we had in this house was
the cannabis legislation. I think that has come home, with the number of people who are now having problems
with cannabis and moving onto other drugs. The government is going to have the same problems. Yes, the
government will be remembered for the railway line that we eventually opened; but it will also be remembered
6178                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

as the government that said that it was okay to grow so many cannabis plants, and the government that said that
it was okay -
Mr J.A. McGinty: Can you try to keep on the issue we’re debating?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Okay, but it is much the same. This will be the government that said that it was okay
for children and women to be trafficked and abused.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Whatever did happen to Duncraig House?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The Attorney General’s government sold it. The Attorney General is not getting the
opportunity; I know what he is trying to do, and it will not work. This bill is not a good bill for the community.
If the member for Avon wants to use the word “prostitute”, I want to know whether he will accept the use of the
phrase “prostitute user”, because these people are prostitute users. Maybe if people are referred to as “prostitute
users”, it might be easier to take the further step of having them seen as prostitute users and abusers, because
they abuse the women they visit.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I am tiring of the debate, as is the Attorney General. I do not think these things will
happen in the bush; I know they will happen. I will give the Attorney General a 100 per cent written guarantee.
If he would like to sign a piece of paper, I will put down $1 000 to say that I am right; I will put down $10 000 if
he wants it, because I know what will happen in my community. The problem with the argument about local
government is that not all local governments have the same horsepower. The member for Moore has spent many
years in regional local government.
I can tell members what happens in my town right now. When a woman or girl decides to start operating as a
prostitute, she is visited by a police officer and a welfare worker, but not because she has broken the law. She
gets a nebulous warning about the fact that the things she is doing will put her children, and the relationship
between her and her children, at risk. Those sorts of arguments are made and that is the sort of pressure that is
currently put on those people. I do not know of any women who have operated long term as prostitutes in my
town, but I have known of many women who started operating and they received the visits I have described.
Under the Attorney General’s bill, those visits will no longer occur.
My local government does not have the capacity to enforce the Attorney General’s bill. I ask the member for
Moore whether my local government has the capacity to enforce this bill.
Mr G. Snook: No; none whatsoever.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: None whatsoever. The Attorney General and the member for Perth - I will throw
him into the ring - may have good intentions in doing this in the metropolitan area, where local governments are
significant organisations. In the regions, local governments are not significant organisations. They do not have
the horsepower to pursue these sorts of matters, and nor will they. If a woman or two women decide to start
operating outside the planning authority of a regional local council, the council will not be able to pursue it. The
council will not have police or welfare agency assistance; the council will be by itself. It will not pursue the
matter. I tell the member for Nedlands that in country towns, unlike in the city, there are no restrictions upon
these women.
Ms S.E. Walker interjected.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I do not see the difference. I agree with the member for Alfred Cove; I cannot see
the difference between the word “prostitute” and “individual sex worker”. To me it is one or the other.
However, I presume that under this process, if the local council wants to shut down an operation, the woman will
be described in the local court as an “individual sex worker”. The reality is that even if the local government
pursues her, there will be no penalty for her, or him if it is a bloke. There is no penalty.
Mr J.N. Hyde: If the penalty is for operating a business, it does not matter whether it’s a “sex worker” or -
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: The member for Perth is correct. If someone rents a house four houses away from
the operator, and the operator just happens to move in for a while, what can local government do about that? If
the council is going to do anything, it will re-engage the whole process and fail again. When, after six or eight
months or a year, the local court is prepared to act, those people will just move house again. Somebody else will
rent the house under the name of Mr Smith and they will start the whole process again. What is the penalty for
doing that? There is no penalty.
I know the Attorney General wants to change the whole process, but I tell him - I am happy to put my neck on
the line - that I know what I say is right. That is what will happen in my community. At least, under the current
arrangements, these women will have some pressure put on them by the police and welfare agencies, and they
will cease operating. In the future they will not. When I refer to them ceasing to operate, I mean the social side.
The sad thing is that I have people in my electorate, just as other members have people in their electorates, who
have difficulty controlling their lives. They have children; that is what I am concerned about. They are the
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6179

people I am concerned about, not the hardcore prostitutes. Those sorts of people are not likely to operate in
Northam.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I still have not been persuaded that we should substitute the word “prostitute” for
“individual sex worker”. I cannot remember who else in the chamber used the term, but they referred to
prostitutes as “victims”, and I think that is a really excellent way of looking at these women. I am not sure
whether it was the member for Wanneroo or somebody else, but I think it is an excellent way of looking at what
is happening to these women. The Attorney General keeps telling us that he is the champion of victims in this
state. This is really about prostituting women and about the pimps who prostitute women. It is about women
who are victims of pimps and brothel owners. I accept what the member for Avon says, but I think it will be
good to go into these women’s lives and find out why they are prostitutes. What is it in their self-esteem and
what has happened in their background that has led them to earn a living in this way, when they have children of
their own? Maybe they have been victimised somewhere else along the way during their life.
The member for Alfred Cove may not find anything wrong with the word “prostitute”, but society does. When
the bill was last debated, I went along to Mary-Anne Kenworthy’s businesses and spoke to some women there.
They felt that legalisation would lead to their gaining respect, but I think that society will still judge them in
relation to what they are doing. I do not judge them, because prostitutes are often victims; there but for the grace
of God go I. When I studied criminology I had to visit Bandyup Women’s Prison. I remember standing there;
the men present felt the same way. All of a sudden they were confronted with all this razor wire. I felt at the
time that some women were there because they had been left with children. It is a well-known fact that women
in Australia are left with children while the men go off and do not make maintenance payments. They are left to
struggle with the emotional and financial problems, and they are desperate sometimes. They do not know which
way to turn. They cannot leave the kids; they cannot go out. I am trying to imagine and to empathise with why
they would do this. We seem to want to grind them into the ground and this bill will continue to grind them into
the ground by moving them on the trains, a bit like the Nazi regime, but instead of going to Auschwitz, they will
go into the brothels.
Mr M. McGowan interjected.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The member for Rockingham may think that is funny.
Mr M. McGowan: I think it is stupid.
Ms S.E. WALKER: It is not stupid because the member for Rockingham has not got the intellectual capacity or
the will or he does not care to understand what this bill will do. It will get rid of those individual sex workers. I
believe the member for Avon, who says that right now in his community, when they know there is someone
operating with their kids to support their children this way, the policeman and someone from the church go
along. There is nothing in this bill about the Department for Community Development getting involved. I
looked in the back of the bill when the member for Avon mentioned services, to see whether there is anything
about the Department for Community Development and there is not. Therefore, with what we are dealing with,
frankly, I would like to see the term “individual sex worker” gone, I would like to see the word “prostitute”
gone, and perhaps we could insert the word “victim” instead.
Mrs D.J. GUISE: I will not be able to support the member for Avon’s amendment. I absolutely agree with the
member for Nedlands about the word “prostitute”. Any members who refer to my speech will note that not once
during that speech did I refer to women in the industry as “sex workers” either. I see the women in this industry
as victims and I believe the proper terminology is “prostituted women” because that is how I see them.
Therefore, I cannot support the member for Avon’s amendment.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I just want to say that I find the member for Wanneroo’s comments very interesting. I
wonder whether she would support an amendment that changed it from “individual sex worker” to what was it -
“victim prostitute”?
Mrs D.J. Guise: Prostituted women.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Prostitution victim.
Mrs D.J. Guise: I would say victims.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Just victims. The only trouble is that it does not really give the meaning of what is
happening with them. A prostituted victim I could understand.
Mrs D.J. Guise: It does not help. It is just how I see it.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I accept that the vast majority of prostitutes are victims - they are - but not all of them.
Let us not kid ourselves: not every woman prostitute is a victim; some do it purely for the money because they
want to earn as much money as quickly as they can. I do not condone that; I do not have any sympathy for those
particular women. The women I have sympathy for are those who are forced into that trade because they are
6180                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

drug addicts or who are forced into it through bullying and intimidation by pimps. Absolutely, they are the ones
we should care about. I do not care about the ones who do it out of pure choice because they want to earn a lot
of money quickly. I do not think any other member of this house would have any sympathy for those people
because what they are doing is wrong. It is not the way we want people in our society to behave. I just wanted
to say that they are not all victims. Upon reflection, I would think the majority probably are. That is why I think
we still need to have the word “prostitute”, which is the amendment proposed by the member for Avon, rather
than the term “individual sex worker”. Once again, “prostitute” gives the true meaning of what these people are
doing, whether they do it willingly and cannot work hard enough - the harder they work, the more money they
get - or whether they are victims. At the end of the day, the function that they are carrying out is prostitution and
they are prostituting their bodies for money.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I appreciated the member for Wanneroo’s contribution. I think that she might not
understand that I have been talking about a functional process. I think the women who operate in my town and
throughout the wheatbelt will not be the classic prostitutes; they will be down-and-out victims. That is my view.
They will be victims of whatever scenario members want to run through. What concerns me about this bill is
that there will be less of a handbrake after the passage of the bill than there is currently. I am concerned that
some of those women out there who are having difficulty getting their lives into perspective, or whatever the
problem may be, will be conned into this process by some male who will be the protector or the standard pimp
and there will be no policemen around and there will be no government agency welfare worker around; there
will be only local government around. It is not going to work; it will be a disaster for my community. That is
my argument. There are two arguments here, and I understand the passion of several of the women who have
spoken, but I have deliberately not stepped into that arena. My arena is a functional argument about what will
happen in my communities when this bill passes.
Mrs D.J. Guise: The concern about the one or two operators.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Personally, and I have not said it before, I think women involved in prostitution
significantly are victims. There is a reason for the process. I think it is sad and I do not want to vilify those
women. Member for Nedlands, there are no agencies in my community to help those women. There are very
good people working in my community with government agencies. Prostitution is not an offence now, but once
living off the earnings of a prostitute is no longer an offence, how can these government agencies get involved
then, member for Albany? How do they?
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): The member for Avon has to refer to me as the Acting Speaker;
he cannot refer to me as a member, I am sorry.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I will wear that, mainly because the Acting Speaker does not want to answer the
question.
Mr R.F. Johnson: You are not allowed to bring the Chair into the debate.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I know, and I will not. The point I make to all country members out there is: how
will this work? The fact is that it will not work. We will have some very sad stories in our communities, which
will be continuous, because there is no process after the passage of this bill to allow some interfacing with an
individual who might be experiencing all the symptoms of a crisis but is operating legally within the intent of
this bill. The police and the welfare agencies will not go to see that person. The ones who will go there are the
local thugs and bikies and the like who will happily have one or two women under their wing and run through
this process. Drug addiction in my community is going through the roof. It is a significant concern as it is, I
presume, in most regional communities. Ten years ago, drug activity in my community was smoking cannabis.
I can tell members that it is far from that now.
I never expected the minister to agree with my amendment, but I put it to him firmly that the bill’s use of the
term “individual sex worker” will not do my community any good at all, whether we follow the structural
argument I have put up or the emotive argument that several of the women members of this chamber have raised.
Whether members take one argument or the other, in both cases this bill will fail. I will have to face the
problems; the minister will not. I live in the town of Northam; I do not live in Perth. I live in that community
and I love going home to that community; I know what is happening in that community more than most
members know what is happening in their metropolitan communities. I can well and truly tell members that.
Therefore, I am very concerned for a small number of people in the wheatbelt who will take this option, not
because it is a good option, but because they think it is an option they can take.
                                                Question to be Put
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I move -
         That the question be now put.
Question put and a division taken with the following result -
                                     [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                             6181

                                                        Ayes (23)

Mr P.W. Andrews               Mr R.C. Kucera                Mr M.P. Murray                  Mrs M.H. Roberts
Dr J.M. Edwards               Mr F.M. Logan                 Mr P. Papalia                   Mr T.G. Stephens
Mrs D.J. Guise                Mr J.A. McGinty               Mr J.R. Quigley                 Mr D.A. Templeman
Mrs J. Hughes                 Mr M. McGowan                 Ms M.M. Quirk                   Mr M.P. Whitely
Mr J.N. Hyde                  Ms S.M. McHale                Ms J.A. Radisich                Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)
Mr J.C. Kobelke               Mrs C.A. Martin               Mr E.S. Ripper


                                                        Noes (20)

Mr C.J. Barnett               Mr M.J. Cowper                Mr P.D. Omodei                  Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan       Mr J.H.D. Day                 Mr D.T. Redman                  Ms S.E. Walker
Mr T.R. Buswell               Dr K.D. Hames                 Mr G. Snook                     Mr G.A. Woodhams
Mr G.M. Castrilli             Ms K. Hodson-Thomas           Dr S.C. Thomas                  Dr J.M. Woollard
Dr E. Constable               Mr R.F. Johnson               Mr M.W. Trenorden               Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)




                                                          Pairs

                              Mr A.J. Carpenter                                 Mr T.R. Sprigg
                              Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan                              Mr M.J. Birney
                              Mr B.S. Wyatt                                     Mr J.E. McGrath
                              Mr A.P. O’Gorman                                  Dr G.G. Jacobs
                              Mr A.D. McRae                                     Mr B.J. Grylls

Question thus passed.
                                                     Debate Resumed
Amendment put and negatived.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: There are a number of amendments in my name on the notice paper that are
consequential on this one. They are on the notice paper because they would have clicked in if this amendment
had been passed. I will not now be moving those other amendments.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I will not move that the house do now adjourn, because this bill is far too important for the
women of this state, and the men who will be caught up in this industry. I will keep going until 6.00 am if
necessary. I feel very passionate about this, as do most people in the chamber. The Attorney General is not
here.
Mr J.C. Kobelke: I am the Minister for Police and Emergency Services.
Ms S.E. WALKER: The minister might say yes to this. I will try my luck. I think the Attorney General would
agree to this, but we will see. I move -
          Page 5, after line 22 - To insert -
                    “sex worker user” has the meaning given to it in section 4;
We are considering clause 5, the definition clause. Currently, in the bill “Sex worker” has the meaning it has
under section 4 of the Prostitution Act. I have already referred to section 4, which gives the definition of
“prostitution”. That will become a commercial sex act. The only word that will change in the definition is the
naming of one of the persons involved in the sex act; that is, the prostitute, who becomes a sex worker. The
person who is being sexually stimulated is the client. That will not change. In order to comply with equal
opportunity principles, I say the client should become a sex worker user. That is my reasoning for this
amendment.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I previously agreed with the member for Nedlands that “sex worker” should be “sex
worker user” rather than “sex worker”. I said earlier in the debate that I had no problem with the word
“prostitute”. A lot of people who have gone into prostitution have done so thinking that it would be something
wonderful, but once in it, they have become victims. Some enter as victims, and others become victims once
they are in the profession. I liked what the member for Wanneroo had to say. Instead of “individual sex worker”
she suggested that they should be considered prostituted women, as they are victims. I wish she had been in on
the debate earlier, because this legislation, rather than being called the “Sexual Services Act”, should be called
the “Prostituted Women Act”, and maybe even have the word “victim” in the title. The member for Nedlands is
now looking at the issue between the prostitute, or the sex worker, and what the government is currently terming
the “client”. She is saying that the terminology should be “sex worker user”. That would be a good amendment
to the bill because it almost introduces some of the concerns of the member for Wanneroo; these women are
victims. Prostituted women become victims who are almost in a crisis situation that gets worse and worse for
6182                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

them. It is not fine to call the people who use prostitutes “clients”. There is a problem in this area. The sex
workers are victims. The Attorney General has coverage of this bill. Many members have told the Attorney
General that he should wear just one hat. He should try to do one thing well rather than do many things at once.
Everyone knows that he loves being the Attorney General. If he wore his hat as the Minister for Health, he
could, under the Health Act, follow the example of Queensland -
                                                  Point of Order
Mr J.A. McGINTY: My point of order is relevance.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): Will the member get back on track?
                                                 Debate Resumed
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I will. I was just pointing out that assistance is given to sex workers in Queensland
under the health portfolio. We are now looking at including in this bill the definition “sex worker user”. I would
prefer the term to be “prostituted women user”, or “victim user”. The Attorney General should set up a
committee to look into this bill. I would not only volunteer to be on the committee, but also support the member
for Wanneroo to be the chair of the committee. We would both do our best to help the women in this state who
have found themselves in these circumstances and we would do our best to try to help women get away from
those terrible circumstances in which they find themselves. The pair of us would make sure that the trafficking
of women that is currently going on in Western Australia was stopped. I will support the member for Nedlands’
amendment. I would prefer the Attorney General to put the bill on hold and send it to a committee that should be
chaired by the member for Wanneroo. The member for Nedlands and I should be members of it. It would have
to include a government member. They are all supporting the bill, so I am not sure which government member it
should be.
Mr C.J. BARNETT: I was quite keen to go on that committee, but I am not quite so sure now! I support the
member for Nedlands’ amendment. The use of the term “client” is part of the problem with this legislation. It
legitimises it. It gives the impression of clients turning up in their pinstripe suits with an AMEX card and that it
is just another business deal.
Dr J.M. Edwards: That is what they do.
Mr C.J. BARNETT: Of course they do, but it legitimises the client, which is inappropriate. Let us call it what
it is. Many women’s groups - not from the Labor Party’s side, except for the member for Wanneroo - will say
that the problem of prostitution is the men who use prostitutes and take advantage of them and exploit them in all
sorts of ways. The people who allow this profession to exist will now be called clients; they will be legitimised,
which is inappropriate. It is inappropriate also for women to be prostitutes. I do not demonise them or make
judgements on them. I do not think it is appropriate for men to use prostitutes. I will not call them clients; they
are abusers of women.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I support the member for Nedlands’ amendment. I agree with what the member for
Cottesloe just said.
Mr C.J. Barnett: You don’t want to be on the committee either?
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: It depends on where it goes. I am sure that the committee would be very useful. What
we have seen so far is the hand-picked task force of the Attorney General, which simply went to New Zealand
and did some work over east. It came back with very little information, in my view. It conducted only a very
little investigation or analysis of what is happening throughout the world. We know what is happening in the
eastern states, where there has been a proliferation of legal and illegal brothels and prostitutes in general. The
number of prostitutes has increased enormously. I agree with the member for Nedlands. As the member for
Cottesloe just said, people who pay money to prostitutes for sex are not clients; lawyers have clients. They
might carry out the same functions for money in some ways. They might well do that, and I am sure that some
of them do. However, men who pay money for sex are not clients.
Ms S.E. Walker: They are hard up.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Some of them are not hard up. Frankly, most of them, from my investigations, are not the
lonely little sad souls who are sitting at home on their own who do not have a girlfriend or a wife. Many of them
are business people. I am told that the majority of them are business people and married men with children.
They actually go and pay a prostitute for sex.
Ms S.E. Walker: And then go home and sleep with their wives.
Dr J.M. Woollard: One in six men use a prostitute and 80 per cent of them are married.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: They are the sorts of figures I have found from my investigations. I do not know about
80 per cent. That figure might be a bit high. My investigations have found that the majority of men who use
prostitutes are predominantly married men with children. They should be ashamed of themselves. Many of
                                     [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                            6183

them are businessmen who might be travelling either interstate or from overseas. When they get to Perth, they
look up The West Australian. I have never seen so many adverts for buxom 26-year-olds ladies, this, that and the
other.
                                                    Point of Order
Mr J.A. McGINTY: This is all very interesting to hear about buxom 26-year-olds, but it has nothing to do with
the motion before the house.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): I am sure the member will get back on track.
                                                   Debate Resumed
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will indeed. We cannot in all consciousness call these people clients. This amendment
will delete the word “clients”. It is appropriate to delete it. Let us not call a spade a shovel; let us call it what it
is. These people are sex worker users. They are users.
Dr J.M. Woollard: And abusers.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: That is not what the amendment says.
Dr J.M. Woollard: It should.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I am sure that it should. The amendment says “sex worker user”. That is what they are.
If I had my way, I would call them “prostitute users” because that would be more appropriate. They are users of
prostitutes. We have gone down that track and I will not go down it again because we have debated that to
death. I support the member for Nedlands’ amendment. If we are going to be honest and truthful about this
legislation, we should use the most appropriate terminology. The word “client” is not appropriate for one second
in regard to this trade. The users of prostitutes are not clients. They are not clients of a lawyer or an accountant
or of a truly professional person in any way shape or form. We cannot for one second call a prostitute a
professional. That would be an untruth. I will support this amendment and I hope that the Attorney General will
support it too. He loves the words “sex worker” but not “prostitute”. Why not be truthful, Attorney General,
and agree to this amendment because it is more appropriate than the term he has used - “client”? That is
nonsense.
Amendment put and a division taken with the following result -
                                                       Ayes (20)

Mr C.J. Barnett              Mr M.J. Cowper                Mr P.D. Omodei                  Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan      Mr J.H.D. Day                 Mr D.T. Redman                  Ms S.E. Walker
Mr T.R. Buswell              Dr K.D. Hames                 Mr G. Snook                     Mr G.A. Woodhams
Mr G.M. Castrilli            Ms K. Hodson-Thomas           Dr S.C. Thomas                  Dr J.M. Woollard
Dr E. Constable              Mr R.F. Johnson               Mr M.W. Trenorden               Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)


                                                       Noes (23)

Mr P.W. Andrews              Mr R.C. Kucera                Mr M.P. Murray                  Mrs M.H. Roberts
Dr J.M. Edwards              Mr F.M. Logan                 Mr P. Papalia                   Mr T.G. Stephens
Mrs D.J. Guise               Mr J.A. McGinty               Mr J.R. Quigley                 Mr D.A. Templeman
Mrs J. Hughes                Mr M. McGowan                 Ms M.M. Quirk                   Mr M.P. Whitely
Mr J.N. Hyde                 Ms S.M. McHale                Ms J.A. Radisich                Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)
Mr J.C. Kobelke              Mrs C.A. Martin               Mr E.S. Ripper




                                                         Pairs

                              Mr T.R. Sprigg                                   Mr A.J. Carpenter
                              Mr M.J. Birney                                   Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan
                              Mr J.E. McGrath                                  Mr B.S. Wyatt
                              Dr G.G. Jacobs                                   Mr A.P. O'Gorman
                              Mr B.J. Grylls                                   Mr A.D. McRae

Amendment thus negatived.
Clause, as amended, put and passed.
Clause 6: Section 4 amended -
Ms S.E. WALKER: Clause 6 amends section 4 of the Prostitution Act, which provides a definition of the act of
prostitution. This bill seeks to rename “prostitution” as “a commercial sex act”. At the moment, clause 6 seeks
to make only two amendments to section 4. One amendment seeks to rename “prostitution” as “a commercial
6184                                 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

sex act” and the other to delete “prostitute” and to insert instead “sex worker”. The bill does not make any
change to the terminology of “client”, which is used in the act. I now move -
         Page 6, after line 5 - To insert -
                  (b)       by deleting “(“the client”)” and inserting instead -
                            “ (“the sex worker user”) ”.
                  (c)       by deleting “client” and inserting instead -
                            “ sex worker user ”.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I will support this amendment if it is in order. It is inappropriate to call the user of
these services a client. As was pointed out earlier, we are talking about prostituted women being victims. I
again say to the member for Nedlands that as we are talking about victims, the term that we should use instead of
“client” is “abuser”. The term “user” is okay. The term “sex worker user” is far more fitting than the term
“client”. It is going to be a very long night, because many of us will go through this bill stage by stage. I
certainly think that what this bill is doing is wrong. If I could persuade the Attorney General to send the bill to a
committee, I would. It is important that we do not use the term “client”. It has been pointed out that the term
“client” implies that the person is using a professional service in which no harm is done and for which a strict
contract is in place. Normally, there are guidelines to follow between a professional person and a client.
However, this industry has no guidelines. I have not verbalised the acts that I was told about by the prostitutes
with whom I have discussed this bill, because I did not think that it was appropriate to do so. Children read
Hansard. I did not want to put on the record some of the horrific stories that I had heard. Some of those stories
took me back 20 or 30 years to when I worked in the mental health area. Some of the stories that they told me
were things that I could remember from when I worked in a locked ward in which padded cells were used.
Horrific things went on there. Several years after I worked in the mental health ward the movie One Flew Over
the Cuckoo’s Nest came out. People thought that what happened in that movie was horrific, but it was nothing
like what really happened in those places. The use of the word “client” implies that there is a contract. What
contract is there with trafficked women? What contract is there when some of these so-called clients hold up
women by gunpoint while they abuse them? How can we call this a professional-client relationship when
prostitutes tell us horror stories? We can read about these trafficked women. I do not know whether the
Attorney General has watched the movie The Jammed, which is about human trafficking. I went to see that
movie. If the member for Hillarys has not seen it, it is well worth seeing. It shows what is happening with these
trafficked women. It is a very good movie. It was very hard as a woman to see that movie and realise what is
taking place in this country.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): Order! I think the member is getting off the track again. Could
the member please get back on the track and talk about the client.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Sorry, Mr Acting Speaker. I agree with the member for Nedlands that it is not
appropriate to have the words “the client” in this clause. I say that because I believe these prostituted women are
victims. I believe the words “the sex worker user”, or “the sex worker abuser”, would be far more appropriate.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: For the sake of consistency, I can inform the house that the opposition will be supporting
the amendment moved by the member for Nedlands. We do so for the reasons that we outlined when we debated
the amendment to the previous clause. I will not waste the time of the house by going over the same debate,
because there is nothing to be gained by that, other than to say that we completely endorse the comments that
have been made by the member for Nedlands and the member for Alfred Cove, and we will be supporting this
amendment.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I want to say a couple more words. While the member for Alfred Cove was talking, I was
thinking about how offensive the word “client” is. When a man beats up a woman physically, the state will
intervene and protect that woman from harm by way of a domestic violence restraining order. When that man
goes to court, he is not called a client. In fact, the woman may not go to court but may suffer in silence, because
of the ramifications that may arise. However, when a man beats up a woman sexually, we are saying that is
okay.
Mr R.F. Johnson: We are not.
Ms S.E. WALKER: No; the government is. The Attorney General has brought in legislation to ensure that
when a man beats up a woman physically and terrorises her, the state will intervene and give her the protection
of the law in the form of a domestic violence restraining order or a misconduct restraining order. However,
when a woman is being victimised by being beaten up sexually, the government is saying, “Go for it!” That is
what this government is saying. That is what the Labor Party is saying. I do not agree with that. I want to
contribute in some small way, because I feel that I am in a very privileged position. I do not want to sit here
quietly and not advocate on behalf of these woman who are victims. I want to say something. In my small way,
I want to point out how the Attorney General, in this appalling piece of legislation, does not even have the
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                            6185

decency to deal with a client who is beating up a woman sexually. The state is sanctioning the behaviour of a
pimp who is beating up a woman sexually. This amendment is my small way of making sure that I point out the
difference between the Liberal Party and the Labor Party in this state on this issue
Amendment put and a division taken with the following result -
                                                     Ayes (20)

Mr C.J. Barnett             Mr M.J. Cowper               Mr P.D. Omodei                  Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan     Mr J.H.D. Day                Mr D.T. Redman                  Ms S.E. Walker
Mr T.R. Buswell             Dr K.D. Hames                Mr G. Snook                     Mr G.A. Woodhams
Mr G.M. Castrilli           Ms K. Hodson-Thomas          Dr S.C. Thomas                  Dr J.M. Woollard
Dr E. Constable             Mr R.F. Johnson              Mr M.W. Trenorden               Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)

                                                     Noes (23)

Mr P.W. Andrews             Mr R.C. Kucera               Mr M.P. Murray                  Mrs M.H. Roberts
Dr J.M. Edwards             Mr F.M. Logan                Mr P. Papalia                   Mr T.G. Stephens
Mrs D.J. Guise              Mr J.A. McGinty              Mr J.R. Quigley                 Mr D.A. Templeman
Mrs J. Hughes               Mr M. McGowan                Ms M.M. Quirk                   Mr M.P. Whitely
Mr J.N. Hyde                Ms S.M. McHale               Ms J.A. Radisich                Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)
Mr J.C. Kobelke             Mrs C.A. Martin              Mr E.S. Ripper




                                                       Pairs

                            Mr T.R. Sprigg                                   Mr A.J. Carpenter
                            Mr M.J. Birney                                   Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan
                            Mr J.E. McGrath                                  Mr B.S. Wyatt
                            Dr G.G. Jacobs                                   Mr A.P. O'Gorman
                            Mr B.J. Grylls                                   Mr A.D. McRae
Amendment thus negatived.
Ms S.E. WALKER: We can now look again at clause 6, which proposes to amend section 4 of the Prostitution
Act. The Attorney General has had the opportunity to look at the Prostitution Act. The Attorney General and
his advisers, and everyone else - the member for Perth, Mr Hyde, Hon Sue Ellery, and Hon Giz Watson - have
all put their minds together and come up with this claptrap of a bill. They obviously did not look at section 4 of
the act, which they are proposing to amend, in detail. Section 4 is all about what prostitution means. It states -
          When this Act refers to prostitution it means prostitution in which payment is consideration for the
          sexual stimulation of a person . . . by means of physical contact between the client and another
          person . . . or between either of them and anything controlled by or emanating from the other . . .
The member for Alfred Cove came up with the thought that that would include a pole dancer, because the person
who was watching that pole dancer would get some sexual stimulation from that. It would also include a stripper
or a skimpy barmaid. Mr Rudd paid money to go into a strip club. Men go into strip clubs to be sexually
stimulated.
Mr J.A. McGinty: You need the other element as well - that is, physical contact.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Well, we do not know what happened, because he blacked out! I can tell members from
my experience as a prosecutor that when people did not want to remember something that was on a video, I
thought, “They are going to black out”, and I waited for it and, sure enough, they blacked out! That was
Mr Rudd - the man who would be Prime Minister. In fact, he would be a sex worker user under this legislation,
but the Attorney General prefers to call him the client. That example shows how this term will give
respectability to people who go to seedy joints and brothels where women are laid on for them and they are
sexually stimulated for money. These women touch. They do that in strip clubs. Has the Attorney General ever
been to a strip club?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Did he have physical contact? Did they touch him? Was Mr Rudd, the man who would be
Prime Minister, with him at the time? I am trying to point out that under the Prostitution Act, the act of
prostitution covers myriad offences, but anyone who benefits from sexual stimulation will still be called the
client. That gives that person respectability, but it denigrates the person who provides the sexual stimulation.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: That was pious claptrap. The word “client” was inserted by the Liberal Party in 2000
when it thought it was appropriate to refer to the person purchasing sexual services as the client. The legislation
that we are amending is the Prostitution Act 2000 and it was introduced by the previous government seven years
ago. It provides that the person who pays money for sexual services is referred to as the client. It is in the act
that we are currently amending.
6186                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Ms S.E. WALKER: That was just a cheap shot, was it not, Attorney General? I bet he said nothing at the time.
Most of the people who were here at that time are not here now, but I am here and so is everybody else and we
are saying that the Attorney General now has the opportunity to improve this bill. His ministerial working group
could not be bothered to look at the Swedish model or anywhere else in the world. The group probably googled
the word “prostitution” a few times and that was it. The Attorney General has the opportunity now to improve
the bill, but what does he do? He says that he did not do it; the Liberal Party did it. The opportunity has
presented itself. The Attorney General had the opportunity and he has chosen to be regressive. He has chosen to
regress the position of women in this state, and I will hold him to account for it.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: We are considering the terminology in this clause. The client is the sex worker user.
The clause seeks to amend the act so that it would state -
         When this Act refers to a commercial sexual act it means a sexual act in which payment is consideration
         for the sexual stimulation of a person (“the client”) . . .
The member for Nedlands referred to Kevin Rudd going to a pole dancing club, which many people would see
as quite innocent. There are different levels of clients. What would happen if the client used someone who had
been trafficked into this country? What would happen if the client abused that person? We would be allowing
this nice terminology of “the client” to be used in a very inappropriate way. I thought it was very appropriate for
the member for Nedlands to remind the Attorney General of other bills that have been passed in this house under
which people have been charged for abuse. However, in this case, we know that abuse is taking place, yet we
are still using this very nice terminology of “the client”. We are just going to let this continue. That is why I
wish you could put a stop to this now, Mr Speaker. I know you cannot, but someone needs to because this bill
should not go any further. It should be referred to a committee. Section 4 of the act goes on to state -
         . . . by means of physical contact between the client and another person . . . or between either of them
         and anything controlled by or emanating from the other, and it is irrelevant whether payment is in
         money or any other form.
Earlier today while you were not in the chamber, Mr Speaker, I pointed out that each year 300 people are
trafficked into Australia. There are probably 1 000 people at any one time who have been trafficked into
different states in Australia and from one state to another. What does the act mean when it says that it is
irrelevant whether payment is in money or any other form? What other form is there when people have been
trafficked and stuck in a hotel with bars on the windows and they cannot get out of those rooms and several
people share a room -
                                                  Point of Order
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Relevance?
The SPEAKER: I was just speaking to the Clerk at considerable length to determine the relevance of the debate
on clause 6. If the member’s comments have relevance to the clause, they are tenuous at best. I ask the member
to direct her comments to the wording of clause 6.
                                                 Debate Resumed
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I was trying to refer to the wording because I cannot support this clause. The act refers
to physical contact and the payment of money, but we know from the various reports that I have referred to today
that many women have been trafficked into the area. Other prostitutes have chosen the profession because of
their drug habits. I wonder whether the Attorney General will explain what the other form of payment is. We
know it is certainly not money for the contract workers who are bonded over here. I am not sure what the
reference to “any other form” means. I cannot support this clause.
                                                  Point of Order
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I raise the same point.
The SPEAKER: I think members need to address the clause. The member’s contribution to clause 6 is now
finished.
                                                 Debate Resumed
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I have a problem with part of clause 6. It states -
         Section 4 is amended as follows:
         (a)      by deleting “prostitution it means prostitution” and inserting instead -
                  “a commercial sexual act it means a sexual act”;
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                           6187

The Attorney General is not making clear in the bill exactly what a sexual act is. It could be the pole dancing
that we have heard about. Prostitution is normally intercourse of some form or another between a female
prostitute and a male person who pays for that particular service. This whole bill is about prostitution, and that is
what I am talking about. The description in clause 6 is a bit misleading where it states that a commercial sexual
act means a sexual act, because a sexual act can be a lot of things. It can be watching someone gyrating around a
room while taking clothes off. That is a sexual act that somebody may want to watch and pay for. I do not
know. However, prostitution is something very different. We cannot say that somebody dancing and taking off
clothes in front of somebody else is prostitution but we can call it a sexual act. I think the Attorney General is
misleading people with this clause in the bill. We will not be supporting clause 6 because we do not believe that
the Attorney General is being honest when describing in that clause the true essence of what this bill is all about.
The SPEAKER: The question is that clause 6 stands as printed. Those of that opinion say aye -
Ms S.E. WALKER: Mr Speaker?
The SPEAKER: I have not put the contrary, but if the member for Nedlands wishes to have the call she must
get up before I put the question.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I thank you for your indulgence, Mr Speaker. It is late in the evening. I just wanted to
correct something that the Attorney General said when speaking of “the client” being put into the bill. I have
looked at the 1999 Hansard, when the Attorney General did not talk on this bill at all. I thought I had better just
set the record straight in light of his contribution and his attack on the Liberal Party; in fact, I think the Attorney
General made only four speeches that year. Maybe it has not been put in there. My final point on this
amendment to section 4 of the Prostitution Act is that it could have been better and fairer for those women
involved, and it is mainly women involved, as the service provider. It could have been fairer and more equitable.
However, the real truth is that the whole thing should be done away with completely. I am very disappointed in
the Attorney General, who for a long period of time has come into this chamber emphasising how much he
supports women when in fact this shows his true colours.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Mr Speaker, I would like to seek clarification from you, because it is late and I might
possibly be a little confused. Are we now up to the Prostitution Amendment Bill 2007, clause 6, “Section 4
amended”?
The SPEAKER: Yes.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Therefore, when I was talking to section 4 and the definition of prostitution, I was
talking to the right clause.
The SPEAKER: Your comments must relate to the clause where it relates to section 4 of the act.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Yes, Mr Speaker, I appreciate that. I was looking at the full clause. I will now wait
until we have looked at those parts and then maybe discuss the clause as a whole afterwards. We are currently
looking at the amendment on the table.
The SPEAKER: No. You must direct your comments on clause 6 of this amendment bill as it relates to
section 4 of the act.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Okay, Mr Speaker.
Clause put and a division taken with the following result -

                                                       Ayes (24)

Mr P.W. Andrews              Mr R.C. Kucera                Mr M.P. Murray                Mrs M.H. Roberts
Dr J.M. Edwards              Mr F.M. Logan                 Mr P. Papalia                 Mr T.G. Stephens
Mrs D.J. Guise               Mr J.A. McGinty               Mr J.R. Quigley               Mr D.A. Templeman
Mrs J. Hughes                Mr M. McGowan                 Ms M.M. Quirk                 Mr P.B. Watson
Mr J.N. Hyde                 Ms S.M. McHale                Ms J.A. Radisich              Mr M.P. Whitely
Mr J.C. Kobelke              Mrs C.A. Martin               Mr E.S. Ripper                Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)


                                                       Noes (20)

Mr C.J. Barnett              Mr M.J. Cowper                Mr P.D. Omodei                Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan      Mr J.H.D. Day                 Mr D.T. Redman                Ms S.E. Walker
Mr T.R. Buswell              Dr K.D. Hames                 Mr G. Snook                   Mr G.A. Woodhams
Mr G.M. Castrilli            Ms K. Hodson-Thomas           Dr S.C. Thomas                Dr J.M. Woollard
Dr E. Constable              Mr R.F. Johnson               Mr M.W. Trenorden             Mr A.J. Simpson (Teller)
6188                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

                                                        Pairs

                             Mr A.J. Carpenter                             Mr T.R. Sprigg
                             Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan                          Mr M.J. Birney
                             Mr B.S. Wyatt                                 Mr J.E. McGrath
                             Mr A.P. O'Gorman                              Dr G.G. Jacobs
                             Mr A.D. McRae                                 Mr B.J. Grylls

Clause thus passed.
Clause 7: Section 4A inserted -
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I just ask about the reference to the chief executive officer for this delegation. I have
looked later in the act and tried to figure out which department the CEO is from.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor. For practical purposes it is whoever the
administration of this act is vested in. It refers to the licensing function, or the certification function; so it is
Racing and Gaming.
Ms S.E. WALKER: This is a new insertion into the act and the CEO is the director general of liquor licensing,
I think.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Mr R.F. Johnson: Is that his title; “director general”?
Ms S.E. WALKER: Who is the CEO we are talking about?
Dr J.M. Woollard: Racing and Gaming.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes, that department.
Mr R.F. Johnson: That is the department, Racing, Gaming and Liquor.
Ms S.E. WALKER: But who is the CEO of the department?
Mr J.A. McGinty: It is Barry Sargeant.
Mr R.F. Johnson: It used to be Barry Sargeant.
Mr J.A. McGinty: It still is.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Barry?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Sargeant.
Ms S.E. WALKER: So who is in charge of Racing and Gaming?
Mr R.F. Johnson: Is he the CEO?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Mr R.F. Johnson: That is not his title.
Mr P.B. Watson: He is the director general.
Mr R.F. Johnson: Exactly; he is not the CEO.
Ms S.E. WALKER: What department are we talking about?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Racing and Gaming.
Ms S.E. WALKER: All right. Who is in charge? Who is the top man?
Mr J.A. McGinty: The minister.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Who is the top man in the department?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Barry Sargeant.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Barry Sargeant, and he is called a chief executive officer.
Mr R.F. Johnson: No he’s not.
Mr J.A. McGinty: I think he is mostly called the director general, but for all legislative purposes we refer to the
CEO, who is the director general.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Of what department? The bill refers to the CEO, but it does not say the CEO of a
particular department. We are talking about the person who will give people with criminal records certificates
and who will legalise brothels.
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6189

Mr J.A. McGinty: As defined in the bill -
         “CEO” means the chief executive officer of the Department;
As defined in the bill -
         “Department” means the department of the Public Service principally assisting the Minister in the
         administration of part 3A of this Act;
In this case it is the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor. That is what it is intended to be and my
understanding is that Barry Sargeant, as the director general of that department, is the CEO that is referred to in
the bill.
Ms S.E. WALKER: I will look on the website. It is important that we know who the chief executive officer is.
Mr J.A. McGinty: I have just told you.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Yes, I know that the Attorney General just told me. It took him a while to work it out
because he did not know his name. I like to check these things, because this is important. Under this clause
“The CEO may delegate to a person any power or duty of the CEO under another provision of this Act”. A
person will be able to make a decision about a brothel even though he or she is not the CEO. Could that person
be anybody in that department?
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I take the point of the member for Nedlands, which is why, by way of interjection, I
questioned the minister about who is the CEO. “CEO” is an acronym for chief executive officer, which is
different from a director general. There is no question about that, otherwise the legislation would refer to the
director general. The Attorney General is at odds with reality. This is important legislation. We all know that
Barry Sargeant is the Director General of the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor. He is not the chief
executive officer. The bill should make exact reference to the person who will make decisions and who will
have the authority to delegate to any other person any power or duty of the chief executive officer. I know that
this issue is causing a problem for the Attorney General, because he is seeking advice from two of his
colleagues. Once again the Attorney General is not too sure about the legislation that he has introduced. If he is
not sure about it, what on earth are we on this side of the house to do, because we do not have banks of staff to
provide accurate advice?
Mr C.J. Barnett: I think we should adjourn while they work it out.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I agree.
Mr J.A. McGinty: What is your question?
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The question is whether the legislation should reflect the position that is being referred to.
There is no chief executive officer of the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor. However, there is a
director general. The bill should refer to the director general.
Mr J.A. McGinty: The relevant provision can be found in either the Interpretation Act or the Public Sector
Management Act. The Under Treasurer, for instance, is not a director general. He is the CEO or the person in
charge of the administration of a department and/or agency.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The Under Treasurer is not a CEO.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes, he is.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: He is the Under Treasurer.
Mr J.A. McGinty: He is the chief executive officer of that department. That is a standard provision that has no
particular relevance to this legislation.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Does the Attorney not think so?
Mr J.A. McGinty: No.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Therefore, it is on the record that the chief executive officer referred to in this bill is the
Director General of the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor, who currently is Barry Sargeant. That is
now in Hansard. Under proposed section 4A, “Delegation”, the CEO is authorised to delegate his power or duty
to another person. The delegation must be in writing and signed by the CEO - the director general - who
currently is Barry Sargeant. At the end of the day he could delegate those powers to anybody in that department.
It could be somebody who is very junior. It does not have to be the CEO’s right-hand person or deputy; it could
be anybody in that department. Am I right in saying that?
Mr J.A. McGinty: I am not sure whether there are further limitations imposed by the agency. Theoretically,
the member is most probably right.
6190                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Under this bill there are no further limitations. Proposed section 4A(1) reads -
         The CEO may delegate to a person any power or duty of the CEO under another provision of this Act.
It does not state what that person must be. It could be a junior in that department who is given the responsibility
for dishing out licences and certificates for this controversial trade in Western Australia.
Mr C.J. BARNETT: This is not a reflection on Mr Sargeant, who is a decent public servant. I question the
choice of the department. Anything that has the slightest touch of vice, excess or even fun, depending on one’s
perspective, is put into this department. There is a clear relationship between organised prostitution, brothels and
casinos. The clientele tends to be the same. I have a concern about conflicts of interest of officers in this
department in performing their duties. At one moment they are assessing casinos, gambling and the like and the
next moment they are dealing with brothel licences. There is an association between those businesses - maybe
informal and a nod and a wink. Everybody knows that the reason there are brothels in and around Victoria Park
is the existence of Burswood Casino. It is as simple as that. They are associated.
I question the appropriateness of this function and the responsibilities that go with it being put in that
department. I would prefer to see this dealt with by another department, but I am not sure what one. Perhaps the
Department of Health, Department of Local Government and Regional Development, given that it has a role in
this legislation, or some other agency might be better able to do that. I have a fear that this agency and the CEO
or whomever he delegates to might find themselves trying to be a Pontius Pilate by dealing with conflicting
points of view about much the same problem. Members can imagine a situation of antisocial conduct, excess
gambling and the use of prostitution - a malaise of issues associated around a gambling or casino outlet with a
nearby brothel. This has the potential for the government to get itself into trouble on this issue.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Under clause 26 proposed section 60 refers to a review of the act and proposed
subclause (1) reads -
         The Minister administering the Health Legislation Administration Act 1984 is to carry out a review of
         the operation and effectiveness of this Act . . .
Perhaps the CEO referred to in clause 7 should come under the health banner. Proposed section 4A(1) states that
the CEO may delegate to a person any power or duty of the CEO. Should that be included in any provision of
this legislation? If it is included in another provision of this legislation, what provisions is it applicable to? This
clause refers to “another provision”, but it is not “any provision”. What does “another provision” mean?
Mr J.A. McGinty: For instance, this is the power to delegate. You cannot delegate the power to delegate; it
must be another power contained in another provision of the legislation and not in this clause that we are dealing
with.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Okay. That makes sense then, Attorney General. In that case, maybe I will follow on
from the comments of the member for Cottesloe, who spoke about whom this act should come under. This
legislation will be reviewed by the Attorney General in his capacity as Minister for Health. Within this bill, we
will later get to occupational health and safety. When one thinks about why this bill has been brought into this
place and the issues associated with this area, surely the people within the Minister for Health’s department
would have far more empathy for these prostituted women who are the victims of circumstance. I am not being
negative towards Mr Barry Sargeant, but I think that we are looking at a health issue rather than a racing and
gaming issue. Putting it under Racing, Gaming and Liquor almost fits with what will happen in WA with the
expansion of legal and illegal brothels, whereas if this came under Health, maybe some people might think that
the Attorney General means to do the right thing. The Attorney General is not doing the right thing with this
bill, but maybe the intent is there. However, at the moment, by leaving it under Racing and Gaming, the sky is
the limit as to how many brothels we will have in each of the suburbs. These will not be people who are
listening to community concerns, and they will certainly not be listening to the concerns of those prostituted
women. In Queensland, the Minister for Health is putting funds forward to help those women get out of the
circumstances that they are in. I hope that the Attorney General will do the same once this bill is implemented.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Proposed subsection (5) states -
         Nothing in this section limits the ability of the CEO to perform a function through an officer or agent.
What does that mean? I do not know the meaning of that. Can the Attorney General explain what that means?
Mr J.A. McGinty: It’s known as the alter ego principle, which gives the minister power to act through the
department. Does that answer your question?
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Put it again.
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6191

Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will put it again. Proposed subsection (5) states -
         Nothing in this section limits the ability of the CEO to perform a function through an officer or agent.
Mr J.A. McGinty: It’s the same thing. The minister can act through his or her agency; the CEO can act
through his or her agency. The alter ego principle is that if a function is vested in the CEO, it can be performed
by the department. There are some limits on the application of that principle.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Can the Attorney General tell us what those limits are, because they are very important?
Mr J.A. McGinty: It is for routine administrative tasks. If it is said that the director general or the CEO is to do
certain things, when things are of a routine administrative nature, they can be performed by the department, and
that satisfies the requirement that it be done by the CEO. It’s a legal principle.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I think I understand what the Attorney General is saying, but this provision implies that
the chief executive officer can perform a function through an officer or an agent. Is the Attorney General saying
that that is an officer of the department? I would not have thought that an agent would be somebody in the
department.
Mr J.A. McGinty: An officer would, generally speaking, be an officer of the department. An agent would be
someone outside the department.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Exactly.
Dr J.M. Woollard: Would that agent be contracted to the department?
Mr J.A. McGinty: It could be, yes. Essentially, this provision preserves the existing law in relation to this issue
of delegation, or acts that are required to be performed by a particular officer being performed by others, when
they can be, on behalf of that person.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I accept that, and that is in the first part of the proposed section, whereby the CEO might
delegate to a person any power or duty -
Mr J.A. McGinty: That’s a specific delegation. This is a general power in the absence of a specific delegation.
It’s the preservation of the existing power.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The chief executive officer would have the power to grant a licence to an applicant, or a
certificate to an applicant for the purposes of operating, owning or managing a brothel. That is what we are
talking about, is it not?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Under proposed section 4A(5), it strikes me that the CEO could simply perform that
function through an agent.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Where things are of an ongoing administrative nature - in other words, not high policy level
decisions - they can be dealt with. It might well be the renewal of a licence, which is automatic in the absence of
any objections, for instance; it could be done in that circumstance. I would not have thought that consideration
of whether a licence should be granted would be covered by that principle.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Of an agent?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Somebody who is not directly employed as an officer of the Department of Racing,
Gaming and Liquor; it could be an outside agent of some sort? That is what it says, and the Attorney General is
now beginning to confirm my interpretation of it. One can say that it is a normal thing and it always happens,
but at the end of the day, the bill states -
         to perform a function through an officer or agent.
It concerns me that the CEO could actually ask an agent to perform the function of the CEO. That is what it
says. I would really appreciate it if the Attorney General could give an accurate answer, because that is a bit of a
concern for me.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I will try to spell it all out. There is an express power of delegation. The CEO has, for
instance, the certification function under this legislation. That function can be delegated to the CEO’s deputy
under the provisions of subclause (1), provided that it is in writing and signed by the CEO. That is a usual
delegation provision. Not every function is expected to be manually and actually performed by the CEO; there is
a power to delegate. Sitting alongside that is an alter ego principle. If a statute provides that a particular
6192                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

function - for instance, motor vehicle licensing - is to be performed by a department, it is not expected that the
head of the department will personally issue every motor vehicle licence. The fact that it is done by clerical staff
is regarded at law as having been done by the department or by the chief executive officer, if that is the person
required to issue that particular licence. That applies only to routine functions and does not apply at a significant
policy level. To specifically answer the member’s question about whether a CEO could delegate to a person
other than a senior person in the department, I guess it technically could happen.
Mr R.F. Johnson: That’s the way I read it; legally they could.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes, but for something of this nature, that would clearly not happen. It is simply an
enabling provision.
Mr R.F. Johnson: One would hope it would never happen.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Yes.
Ms S.E. WALKER: Consideration of this section really makes me look at another area concerning the
Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor, which is quite horrifying. The minister responsible for that
department is Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich. I visited the department’s website and searched for “CEO” and found
nothing. I tried “director general” and nothing came up. The Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor seems
to me to be divided into three sections. Applications for brothels will not be considered by the liquor section or
the racing section; they will be considered by the gaming section, which is the gambling section. Under the
gambling section of the department’s website, one can download application forms for “Standard Lotteries
(raffles)”; “Calcutta”; “Bingo”; “Two-Up”; “Gaming Functions”; and “Operator’s Certificate”. There is a paper
on the department’s website about the history of the Western Australian gaming legislation. It tells us what it is
all about. It is scary. The paper refers to gaming being legalised and it talks about the report of the royal
commission into gambling. It states -
         “The fact of the matter seems to be that crime syndicates and other forms of organised crime feed
         on the desire of people to gamble and, where the law forbids gambling, organised crime finds a
         ready market for the illegal gambling it provides”
This is on the department’s website, in an article about the history of gaming. It can be found in the gambling
section. It continues -
         “properly sited we are of the firm opinion that a casino could do little harm to the community but
         could bring about the much needed development of a suitable area as a major resort and tourist
         centre with resultant advantages to the State
We have a grant of a casino licence. It may have been the member for Hillarys who was talking about brothels
proliferating around the casino.
It is so tawdry to women to put this under the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor. Frankly, it is just an
evil piece of legislation. It will not be up to the CEO or the containment policy to decide on a certain number of
brothels. It will just be a case of hitting a button for an application for an operator’s certificate and then it can be
sent off. It is intended to be that easy. I am sorry if you think I am straying, Mr Speaker, but this issue comes
back to who will have the power to issue an operator’s certificate. Once he gets the application, the CEO can
delegate to any number of people. He has to send it off to the police commissioner, who sends it back to them
with maybe a covering note saying that the contents of the person’s character cannot be revealed. It is a bit like
the Attorney General’s foray into the CEO parole provision. Who can forget that? We had the issue of alleged
truth in sentencing. I said that the CEO parole provision would be a big catastrophe. It was repealed not long
after. I ask that the Attorney General withdraw this bill. The further we go into it and the more we look at it, the
worse it gets.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: We are looking at the department that the bill comes under. If it comes under some
other part in the act, I am quite happy to wait. Does the bill say somewhere that for the next two years there can
only be a certain number of licences or X number of operators who can open brothels? If there is nothing in
there at all, is it the case that we could get 50, 500 or 5 000 brothels?
Mr J.A. McGinty: You can get two.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I do not think that will happen after what happened in the eastern states. This is very
worrying. What did it say earlier in the bill when it mentioned the review? The review will not be for two years.
I thank the Attorney General for his response. I was opposed to the bill before and I am even more opposed now
because I am very concerned about just how many brothels, illegal and legal, there will be as a result of this
legislation.
Clause put and a division taken with the following result -
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                           6193

                                                      Ayes (24)

Mr P.W. Andrews              Mr R.C. Kucera               Mr M.P. Murray                  Mrs M.H. Roberts
Dr J.M. Edwards              Mr F.M. Logan                Mr P. Papalia                   Mr T.G. Stephens
Mrs D.J. Guise               Mr J.A. McGinty              Mr J.R. Quigley                 Mr D.A. Templeman
Mrs J. Hughes                Mr M. McGowan                Ms M.M. Quirk                   Mr P.B. Watson
Mr J.N. Hyde                 Ms S.M. McHale               Ms J.A. Radisich                Mr M.P. Whitely
Mr J.C. Kobelke              Mrs C.A. Martin              Mr E.S. Ripper                  Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)


                                                      Noes (18)

Mr C.J. Barnett              Mr M.J. Cowper               Mr D.T. Redman                  Mr G.A. Woodhams
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan      Mr J.H.D. Day                Mr G. Snook                     Dr J.M. Woollard
Mr T.R. Buswell              Dr K.D. Hames                Mr M.W. Trenorden               Dr S.C. Thomas (Teller)
Mr G.M. Castrilli            Mr R.F. Johnson              Mr T.K. Waldron
Dr E. Constable              Mr P.D. Omodei               Ms S.E. Walker




                                                        Pairs

                             Mr A.J. Carpenter                                Mr T.R. Sprigg
                             Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan                             Mr M.J. Birney
                             Mr B.S. Wyatt                                    Mr J.E. McGrath
                             Mr A.P. O'Gorman                                 Dr G.G. Jacobs
                             Mr A.D. McRae                                    Mr B.J. Grylls

Clause thus passed.
Clause 8: Part 2 heading amended -
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: This clause is, to some extent, a rerun of some of the other clauses that we have dealt
with. The opposition opposes this clause because, once again, the Attorney General wishes to try to diminish the
severity of prostitution, brothels and pimps - those who live off the immoral earnings and all the other things that
go with it - and what many members believe is the disgraceful abuse of women. Once again, it gives a not very
truthful description of the content, meaning and outcome of the bill. Once again, I refer to the comments I made
earlier, that commercial sexual acts can be a whole range of things that are not connected with prostitution or the
function of intercourse, whether it be oral, or whatever these people get up to. Once again, it could be pole
dancing - Mr Rudd’s favourite pastime. That could be a commercial sexual act. They are not exactly doing
ballerina stuff on the pole; they are gyrating in a sexually seductive manner, so I am told. This is obviously what
Kevin Rudd finds so interesting when he visits New York and Washington. That is obviously the reason for it.
That is a commercial sexual act, because the person doing the pole dancing is being paid to do it. The person
who goes into such a club, like Kevin Rudd did in American, pays money to get in.
Mr T. Buswell: No; he got a diplomatic freebie.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Somebody paid money for it. Somebody paid the money for Kevin Rudd to get into that
nightclub, or that pole dancing club. That is a commercial sexual act. Money is being paid, but it is not
prostitution.
Mr M.P. Murray: Would a trapeze artist be in the same category?
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: That is an interesting observation. I think a trapeze artist would actually be more artistic
than a pole dancer. As I understand it, pole dancing is a commercial sexual act. These women do not do pole
dancing for nothing. They get paid to do it, so it is a commercial sexual act, but that is not the meaning in the
bill.
Mr M.P. Whitely interjected.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I will take that up any time the member likes. When people start misquoting, selective
quoting and all the rest of it, I find that appalling. I could go out and say that the Premier admits he has visited
brothels. It is a true comment; that is what he said. It would not sound very good, would it? That is the sort of
dirty trick I leave to members opposite to get up to. We try to live with a higher moral standard on this side of
the house, rather than getting into the gutter like government members.
Mrs J. Hughes: You are doing so well.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I am, and I am trying to emphasise that the definition the Attorney General wants to
include in this bill is not a true and accurate description. It is an untruth. We should have the truth in all of our
legislation; that is not the case in the bill before the house.
6194                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

                                                    Question to be Put
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I move -
          That the question be now put.
Question put and a division taken with the following result -
                                                         Ayes (24)

Mr P.W. Andrews              Mr R.C. Kucera                  Mr M.P. Murray                  Mrs M.H. Roberts
Dr J.M. Edwards              Mr F.M. Logan                   Mr P. Papalia                   Mr T.G. Stephens
Mrs D.J. Guise               Mr J.A. McGinty                 Mr J.R. Quigley                 Mr D.A. Templeman
Mrs J. Hughes                Mr M. McGowan                   Ms M.M. Quirk                   Mr P.B. Watson
Mr J.N. Hyde                 Ms S.M. McHale                  Ms J.A. Radisich                Mr M.P. Whitely
Mr J.C. Kobelke              Mrs C.A. Martin                 Mr E.S. Ripper                  Mr S.R. Hill (Teller)


                                                         Noes (17)

Mr C.J. Barnett              Mr J.H.D. Day                   Mr G. Snook                     Dr J.M. Woollard
Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan      Dr K.D. Hames                   Mr M.W. Trenorden               Dr S.C. Thomas (Teller)
Mr T.R. Buswell              Mr R.F. Johnson                 Mr T.K. Waldron
Mr G.M. Castrilli            Mr P.D. Omodei                  Ms S.E. Walker
Mr M.J. Cowper               Mr D.T. Redman                  Mr G.A. Woodhams




                                                           Pairs

                             Mr A.J. Carpenter                                   Mr T.R. Sprigg
                             Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan                                Mr M.J. Birney
                             Mr B.S. Wyatt                                       Mr J.E. McGrath
                             Mr A.P. O'Gorman                                    Dr G.G. Jacobs
                             Mr A.D. McRae                                       Mr B.J. Grylls

Question thus passed.
                                                    Debate Resumed
Clause put and passed.
Clause 9: Section 7 amended -
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I refer to clause 5 in the blue copy of the bill, “Division 1 - Persons generally”. This is
not mentioned on the notice paper and there are several changes in the terminology from “prostitute” to “sex
worker”. Has the Attorney General overlooked them?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Which page are you on?
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: In my copy of the bill, clause 8, “Part 2 heading amended”, reads -
          The heading to Part 2 is amended by deleting “prostitution” and inserting instead -
                    commercial sexual acts
There are changes from “prostitute” to “sex worker” the whole way through. Does the Attorney General’s bill
not contain division 1?
Mr J.A. McGinty: I am fairly sure it is a consequential amendment.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: I looked earlier but could not see that it was a consequential amendment, which is why
I wondered whether the Attorney General wanted to address it now. It can be addressed later.
Mr J.A. McGinty: It is found in clause 28 of the bill.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Will we go back and deal with it?
Mr J.A. McGinty: We are not going back. Later, clause 28 deals with all the consequential amendments of that
nature, and picks up the point the member has raised.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Under this clause -
Mr J.A. McGinty: I think you will support this one.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: Of course I will, but I want to make sure that the Attorney General has got it right,
because he has not got it right on certain other occasions tonight. I also want to look at the penalty. Clause 7 of
the blue bill states -
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6195

         (1)      A person is not to -
                  (a)      assault or threaten to assault anyone;
                  (b)      intimidate anyone;
                  (c)      supply or offer to supply a prohibited drug to anyone;
                  (d)      make a false representation or use any false pretence or other fraudulent means . . .
A person is not to induce someone to act as a prostitute either. The government says “sex worker”, but I will say
“prostitute” because that is more accurate. The clause goes on and on. All those things are absolutely right; of
course they are. I am worried about paragraph (c) because people know that many of the prostitutes who work in
the illegal brothels, and a lot of prostitutes throughout the world, are drug users. That is the main reason why
some of them continue to remain in the trade and sell their bodies for money; it is so they can pay for the drugs
that they are addicted to. Who will police all this? This sounds good and tough, but like a lot of the things that
the Attorney General says, they sound tough and sometimes they sound good but they end up being a box full of
cotton wool and do not achieve anything because there are no successful outcomes. Who will do all this? Is it
down to the police to do it? Will the CEO of the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor do it? How much
involvement will that department have in ensuring that none of these things take place? How would someone
know whether those things even took place? Currently, we are guessing that they might. I would say without a
doubt that they would happen in many cases. The Liberal Party will support that part of the bill.
Mr J.A. McGinty: I knew that I would get you to support something eventually.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The Attorney General knows how reasonable I am. I will support what is reasonable. I
will support any clause in the bill that will protect other people from harm, intimidation, being assaulted and
being offered drugs. Of course we will do that; we do not have a problem with that. How will this be policed?
How much credence can we give to this measure being achievable? Who will police it? Who will ensure that
anybody who commits any of these crimes for which the punishment is set out in the bill will receive the penalty
set out in the bill, which is imprisonment for 10 years? Will one-third of the sentence automatically be reduced?
Mr J.A. McGinty: We do not do that anymore.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: No. Currently, one-third must be taken off before the sentence is given. Is the Attorney
General saying that that is a minimum sentence of 10 years?
Mr J.A. McGinty: It is not really relevant to the clause, but -
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: It is relevant. We are talking about amending the whole clause, or at least part of it.
Mr J.A. McGinty: The penalty is not amended. What is in the bill at the moment is in the Prostitution Act.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: I realise that, but perhaps the penalty should have been amended as well. It might not be
sufficient. When was the penalty legislated for? Was it seven years ago?
Mr J.A. McGinty: Yes.
Mr R.F. JOHNSON: It is probably not enough today because of the rate of inflation and the consumer price
index. Unfortunately, in this state, many fines and penalties do not increase as they should. That is no fault of
the Attorney General; it has happened for years under various governments. Some fines for an offence today
might not have increased from $50, the figure decided on when they were legislated for 20 years ago. I suggest
that the Attorney General might want to look at that. We will support the clause.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: We do not generally index terms of imprisonment according to the CPI.
Mr R.F. Johnson: I was talking about fines.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: This does not involve a fine. It involves a term of imprisonment of 10 years. However,
putting that to one side, this is a provision that I think everyone in the house should be able to support. It will
toughen the law by making it a crime to influence any person to act, or continue to act, as a prostitute, by adding
to the existing grounds a number of provisions from the New Zealand legislation. It expressly lays out that any
person who uses any power or authority arising out of an occupation or vocational position held by that person,
or any relationship existing between that person or anyone else, as a means of keeping someone in prostitution,
or to entice or induce someone into becoming a prostitute, commits an offence. That is in addition to the
existing provisions relating to assault, intimidation, supplying a drug, and things of that nature. In addition to
that, and again from New Zealand, we have accepted that to make an accusation or disclosure about a person
about any offence that has been committed by that person, whether true or false, in order to induce that person to
become or remain a prostitute -
Mr R.F. Johnson: A sex worker.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am trying to make sure the member for Hillarys understands what I am saying!
6196                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Mr R.F. Johnson: I do! That is the problem!
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Very importantly, to report that someone is unlawfully in Australia, whether true or false,
and to use that as an inducement to get that person to become a prostitute, is an offence. In addition, we have
added the ground that any person who uses threats to induce a person to surrender the proceeds of acting as a sex
worker commits an offence that is punishable by imprisonment for 10 years. This provision will strengthen the
law in relation to inducing a person to act as a sex worker. Hopefully, that is something that we can agree upon.
My intention is to then move, upon the passage of this particular clause, that the debate be adjourned. It is a
good note to finish on.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: The penalty under this section is imprisonment for 10 years. Is that related to another
act as well, or is it simply because of this act?
Mr J.A. McGinty: It is simply because of this act.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: It is not because of the Criminal Code or anything like that?
Mr J.A. McGinty: It is unrelated to the Criminal Code. It is a sex worker-specific provision. It is designed to
make sure that people - women in particular - are not induced into prostitution as a result of threats that are made
against them. It covers a wide variety of threats.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: It does go a lot further than it did previously. However, it still does not address the
issue of trafficking. Maybe we could leave this on the table and the Attorney General could think about this
tomorrow and put in something about trafficking as well.
Mr J.A. McGinty: Maybe we could not!
Ms S.E. WALKER: I disagree with the Attorney General. I think this is a con job. It is just a little sweetener.
All the Attorney General has done is give us a few examples of how a person can assault, threaten or intimidate
someone. That is already covered in section 7 of the act, which states that it is an offence to assault, or threaten
to assault, anyone, or to intimidate anyone. That is all this is doing. The Attorney General is wrong. The
Attorney General is not toughening up the law, because it is already a crime. The penalty is already
imprisonment for 10 years. That is because when the Liberal Party brought in this act, we also brought in a
penalty of imprisonment for 10 years. All the Attorney General is doing is putting in a few things here and there,
and padding it out a bit, so that he can pretend that he is doing something more with this section than he is.
Under proposed paragraph (db), if a person makes an accusation or disclosure, whether true or false, of any
offence committed by anyone, or of any misconduct etc, is that not a threat? Is that not intimidation? It comes
under the threats provision in the Criminal Code in any event. I think it is section 333. This clause adds nothing.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Which agency will be responsible for prosecuting an offence under this clause? I
presume it will be the Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor.
Mr J.A. McGinty: No; the police.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: How will the police get involved? The purpose of the bill up to now has been to
remove the police from a process that they have been involved in for a hundred years. Can the Attorney General
describe to us how the police will be involved? If any of the offences in this clause are committed, it means that
somebody will have to interview the sex workers. It will not be because a client thought that an Asian girl
looked as though she was under stress. The industry is not like that. There will need to be some sort of process
whereby the police regularly do a check or whatever. I am interested in how that will happen.
Mr J.A. McGinty: It will be the same as for any other crime when it is committed. It will be drawn to the
attention of the police by a report or a complaint, or the police might detect that this has occurred, and they will
investigate, and if they can get sufficient evidence, they will lay a charge.
Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: I am looking deep into the Attorney General’s eyes and he has “go home” eyes, so I
do not really want to continue the debate for much longer. I respectfully say to the Attorney General that the
police are a busy group of people. There are a couple of ex-police officers in this chamber. There is a raft of
things that the police have to do. I think we can all agree that the individuals the Attorney General is trying to
protect under this provision are generally victimised. The bolshie ones will not be caught by this provision; it
will be the people who are victims of some form. Those people rarely pop to the surface. They rarely say that
they are in some sort of process, because they are told that if they are illegal immigrants and they come forward,
they will be deported from the country. Unless the police do some sort of systematic process, I do not believe
this provision will be able to be used effectively.
Dr J.M. WOOLLARD: Clause 7 of the blue bill, “Seeking to induce person to act as sex worker”, states -
         (1)      A person is not to -
                  (a)      assault or threaten . . .
                  (b)      intimidate . . .
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                        6197

                   (c)      supply or offer . . .
                   (d)      make a false representation . . .
Then the other paragraphs are added. The Attorney General said earlier that the Department of Racing, Gaming
and Liquor will have no record of the number of brothels that can be licensed. There is no reference to bribes in
the bill. Some people could offer women hundreds of dollars to work for them. That is how people get involved
in the industry. They are not necessarily being offered drugs, but they are being enticed to work in brothels with
an offer of money. The bill does not refer to the amount of money. I do not think the provision goes far enough
when it refers to the intention of inducing another person to continue to act. Perhaps the Attorney General can
explain it to me. My concern is that this industry will grow, as will the trafficking of sex workers. As the
industry grows, assaults will increase, as will crime and the provision of drugs. The provision that deals with
seeking to induce a person to act as a sex worker does not refer to the bribery that will be applied to attract young
girls who have no money and are looking for somewhere to go. People will not have to use any power from any
occupational or vocational position. Because there are not enough support services for those people, they will be
enticed into this area. This bill will allow that. The Attorney General surely does not want to put a bill through
this house that will see the number of prostituted women, the victims of sexual assault and abuse, and the
number of trafficked women grow out of all proportion. I do not think that this clause really does what I would
like to see it do, which is to try to stop this industry from growing larger, which is what has happened in Victoria
and the eastern states as brothels have been legalised and decriminalised. Unless there is something else, I think
this clause is very disappointing.
Mr P.D. OMODEI: This clause amends section 7 of the Prostitution Act 2000, section 7(1) of which states -
         (e)       do anything else, or refrain from doing anything,
         with the intention of inducing another person who is not a child to act, or continue to act, as a prostitute.
The bill deletes “prostitute” and inserts -
         sex worker or to surrender the proceeds of acting as a sex worker
I understand that most prostitutes who work in brothels do currently surrender part of their proceeds to the
brothel madam or the owner of the brothel. Does amending this section in this way mean that it will outlaw a
practice that is currently happening in brothels around the state?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: It is my understanding that, for instance, in some brothels there is an arrangement
whereby the client pays the sex worker and pays the brothel. It might be on a 50-50 split or something of that
nature. There could be a variety of payment methods. The advice that I have received is that inducing a sex
worker to surrender the proceeds of acting as a sex worker would not cover a commercial contract for the use of
premises, for instance, where the house gets 50 per cent and the sex worker gets the other 50 per cent, or things
of that nature. It would, in my view, catch an unconscionable arrangement or an arrangement that was not
previously agreed between the parties.
Mr P.D. Omodei: How do you prove that?
Mr J.A. McGINTY: Evidential issues are always associated with this. It would obviously be reasonably
dependent upon a complaint. I guess that is the point the member for Avon makes about the enforceability of
these provisions. At least it gives people, generally speaking the sex workers themselves, an ability to use the
law to protect themselves I think in a stronger way that is currently the case.
Clause put and passed.
Debate adjourned, on motion by Mr J.A. McGinty (Attorney General).

                                        WILLS AMENDMENT BILL 2006
                                                      Returned
Bill returned from the Council without amendment.

                                                       BILLS
                                                        Assent
Message from the Governor received and read notifying assent to the following bills -
1.       Biosecurity and Agriculture Management Rates and Charges Bill 2006.
2.       Biosecurity and Agriculture Management Bill 2006.
3.       Biosecurity and Agriculture Management (Repeal and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2006.
6198                             [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

                               PROSTITUTION AMENDMENT BILL 2007
                               Standing Orders Suspension - Notice of Motion
By leave, Mr J.C. Kobelke (Leader of the House), gave notice that at the next sitting of the house he would
move -
        That so much of the standing orders be suspended as is necessary to allow -
        (a)     a motion or motions to be moved without notice and decided without debate to consider two or
                more clauses of the Prostitution Amendment Bill 2007 as one question; and
        (b)     the third reading of the bill to be moved on the same day the consideration in detail stage is
                concluded.
                                 House adjourned at 12.09 am (Wednesday)
                                                 __________
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6199


                                          QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

                                Questions and answers are as supplied to Hansard.

                                PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM - TEACHERS
2495.    Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Education and Training
(1)      How many teachers (total headcount) were there in the Western Australian public education system at
         30 June 2007?
(2)      How many teachers (total FTE) were there in the Western Australian public education system
         at 30 June 2007?
Mr M. McGOWAN replied:
(1)      There were 18,743 teachers with the position title of Classroom Teacher as at 28/6/2007, the last pay of
         the financial year.
         The total teaching workforce was 22,795 at 28/6/2007. This number includes unattached teachers,
         teachers seconded to other organisations, or school administrators, who are defined as members of the
         teaching staff under Section 237 of the School Education Act 1999. A majority of school administrators
         teach in classrooms up to .8 of a full time load
(2)      16,342
                    GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES - CREDITORS -
                           NUMBER AND AMOUNT OUTSTANDING
2551.    Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister representing the Minister for Local Government; Racing and Gaming;
         Multicultural Interests and Citizenship; Government Enterprises; Minister Assisting the Minister for
         Planning and Infrastructure; Goldfields-Esperance; Youth
For each Department and Agency within the Minister’s portfolios:
         (a)      what was the amount and number of creditors outstanding for less than or equal to 30 days as
                  at 30 June 2007;
         (b)      what was the amount and number of creditors outstanding for less than or equal to 60 days as
                  at 30 June 2007;
         (c)      what was the amount and number of creditors outstanding for less than or equal to 90 days as
                  at 30 June 2007;
         (d)      what was the amount and number of creditors outstanding for less than or equal to 120 days as
                  at 30 June 2007; and
         (e)      what was the amount and number of creditors outstanding more than 120 days as
                  at 30 June 2007?
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied:
For all Departments and Agencies the following should be noted -
Late Billings
Some creditors do not submit invoices for more than 30 days after the goods or services are supplied. The date
recorded in the finance system is the date of the invoices (not the date the invoice is received) and therefore such
invoices will appear as outstanding for more than 30 days even if they are paid on the day they are received.
Accounts in dispute
Accounts not approved for payment until any dispute is resolved.
Misdirected invoices (external)
Some creditors submit invoices to the wrong address and the invoices do not reach Agencies or Departments
until they are after 30 days.
Misdirected invoices (internal)
Some Agencies or Departments have decentralised budget controllers and sometimes invoices can be sent to the
wrong budget controller causing delays.
Grant payments
Grant payments are subject to a lengthy approval process, which can result in delays in payment.
6200                              [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Goldfields-Esperance Development Commission
        (a)     Amount $19 596. Number of creditors-nine
        (b)-(e) Nil
Gold Corporation of WA
        (a)       Amount $462 141.50. Number of creditors - 181
        (b)       Amount $34 629.04. Number of creditors - seven
        (c)       Amount $698.69. Number of creditors - four
        (d)       Amount $8 178.94. Number of creditors - eight
        (e)       None
Government Employees Superannuation Board
        (a)       Amount $734 090.12. Number of creditors - 18
        (b)       Amount $17 592.40, number of creditors - four
        (c)       Amount $10 514.45, number of creditors - two
        (d)-(e)   Nil
Insurance Commission of Western Australia
        (a)     Amount - $1 227 126. Number of Creditors - 36
        (b)-(e) Nil
Department of Planning and Infrastructure
Please refer to Parliamentary Question on notice LA 2555 referred to the Minister for Planning and
Infrastructure.
Lotterywest
        (a)     Amount - $3 086 793.20. Number of creditors- 110
        (b)-(e) Nil
Department of Racing, Gaming and Liquor
        (a)       Amount $10 105. Number of creditors - five
        (b)       Amount $1 147. Number of creditors - two
        (c)-(e)   Nil.
Burswood Park Board
        (a)-(e)   Nil
Western Australian Greyhound Racing Association
        (a)     Amount $294 847. Number of creditors - 143
        (b)-(e) Nil
Youth
        (a)       Nil
        (b)       Amount $709.50. Number of creditors - two
        (c)-(e)   Nil
Department of Local Government
        (a)       Amount $803 985.79. Number of creditors - 104
        (b)       Amount $104 354.54. Number of creditors - 28
        (c)       Amount $0. Number of creditors - zero
        (d)       Amount $12 725.40. Number of creditors - two
        (e)       Amount $110 000.00. Number of creditors - one
                    GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES - CREDITORS -
                           NUMBER AND AMOUNT OUTSTANDING
2555.   Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
For each Department and Agency within the Minister’s portfolios:
        (a)       what was the amount and number of creditors outstanding for less than or equal to 30 days as
                  at 30 June 2007;
        (b)       what was the amount and number of creditors outstanding for less than or equal to 60 days as
                  at 30 June 2007;
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                    6201

          (c)      what was the amount and number of creditors outstanding for less than or equal to 90 days as
                   at 30 June 2007;
          (d)      what was the amount and number of creditors outstanding for less than or equal to 120 days as
                   at 30 June 2007; and
          (e)      what was the amount and number of creditors outstanding more than 120 days as
                   at 30 June 2007?
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied:
I have been advised by the agencies as follows:
Broome Port Authority
          (a)      64 creditors, invoices totalling $264355.06 64
          (b)      8 creditors, invoices totalling $7240.99 8
          (c)      1 creditor, invoices totalling $102105.40 1
          (d)      Nil
          (e)      Nil
The Broome Port Authority makes every effort to pay creditors within 30 days, however there are circumstances
under which this is not possible. Examples, which are reflected in the figures provided below are:
Late Billing
Some creditors do not submit invoices for more than 30 days after the goods or services are supplied. The date
recorded in the finance system is the date of the invoice (not the date the invoice is received) and therefore such
invoices will appear as outstanding for more than 30 days even if they are paid on the day they are received.
Accounts in dispute
Accounts are not approved for payment until any dispute is resolved.
Instalment Payments
Recorded in the finance system are some expense that are paid in instalments. The whole amount of the invoice
is entered into the finance system even though the instalments payments are not currently due.
LandCorp and Armadale Redevelopment Authority
          LandCorp                                     ARA
(a)       290 creditors totalling $3,159,094.76        18 creditors totalling $248,408.74
(b)       143 creditors totalling $1,427,183.60        6 creditors totalling $109,445.32
(c)       103 creditors totalling $990,576.76          7 creditors totalling $441,827.20
(d)       64 creditors totalling $809,835.81           7 creditor s totalling $4,575.48
(e)       85 creditors totalling $855,098.08           13 creditors totalling $441,827.20
LandCorp and the Armadale Redevelopment Authority (ARA) make every effort to pay creditors either in
accordance with their own terms or within 30 days of the invoice date, however, there are circumstances under
which this is not possible. Examples, which are reflected in the figures above, are;
Late Billing
All retention and some other invoices are required to go via a third party, for example to an engineer, prior to
receipt at LandCorp or ARA. Quite often these invoices are backdated to a prior month. As a result, these
invoices may have already exceeded their payment terms before LandCorp or ARA receives them.
Accounts in Dispute
Accounts are not approved for payment until any dispute is resolved.
General Hold-ups, Examples Include
• Invoices may e emailed directly to Project Manager or collected on site by the Project Manager rather than
   directly addressed to agency's finance section with subsequent delays recording these invoices
•     Invoices contained incorrect contact details and required follow up.
•     Invalid Tax invoices needed to be returned for replacement.
Department for Planning and Infrastructure (DPI)
(a)       Amount: $1,396,116.75; Creditors: 189
(b)       Amount: $243,824.91; Creditors: 19
(c)       Amount: $9,291.80; Creditors: 5
(d)       Amount: $19,725.62; Creditors: 3
(e)       Amount: $1,000; Creditors: 1
6202                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

The above statistics are based on data contained within DPI's Financial Management System. DPI's system
records the date on the suppliers invoice and this is the base for determining payment time frames. Unfortunately
this means that legitimate causes for delay such as, supplier delays in posting invoices, incorrectly addressed
invoices, invoice disputes etc are not readily identified. To take account of these legitimate delays, changes to
DPI financial Management System would be required. Anecdotal evidence suggests that many of the payments
outside of the 30 day compliance are the result of legitimate delays. This aside DPI makes every effort to pay
creditors within 30 days.
Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC)
(a)      323 creditors, invoices totalling $3,111,795
(b)      25 creditors, invoices totalling $21,678
         The date recorded in the finance system is the date of the invoice (not the date the invoice is
         received). For the majority of the creditors outstanding, the WAPC did not receive the invoice until
         June 2007 (within 30 days).
(c)      5 creditors, invoices totalling $5,505
(d)      Nil
(e)      1 creditor, invoices totalling $582
Main Roads WA
(a)      996 creditors, invoices totalling $17,589,236.31
(b)      109 creditors, invoices totalling $149,029.91
(c)      Nil
(d)      Nil
(e)      Nil
Main Roads makes every effort to pay creditors within 30 days, however there are circumstances under which
this is not possible. Examples, which are reflected in the figures provided below are:
Late billing
Some creditors do not submit invoices for more than 30 days after the goods or services are supplied. The date
recorded in the finance system is the date of the invoice (not the date the invoice is received) and therefore such
invoices will appear as outstanding for more than 30 days even if they are paid on the day they are received.
Accounts in dispute
Accounts are not approved for payment until any dispute is resolved.
Grant payments
Grant payments are not made until the Department is satisfied that any required milestones have been met. This
can cause delays in payment.
Misdirected invoices
Payment can be delayed if invoices are incorrectly addressed.
Albany Port Authority
(a)      52 creditors, invoices totalling $250,318
(b)      2 creditors, invoices totalling $35,640
         Some creditors do not submit invoices for more than 30 days after the goods or services are supplied.
         The date recorded in the finance system is the date of the invoice (not the date the invoice is received)
         and therefore such invoices will appear as outstanding for more than 30 days even if they are paid on
         the day they are received.
(c)      Nil
(d)      Nil
(e)      Nil
Fremantle Port Authority
(a)      212 creditors, invoices totalling $7,248,374
(b)      Nil
(c)      Nil
(d)      Nil
(e)      Nil
Midland Redevelopment Authority
(a)      2 creditors, invoices totalling $59
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                    6203

(b)      1 creditor, invoices totalling $990. A dispute with creditor has caused the delayed payment.
(c)      Nil
(d)      Nil
(e)      1 creditor, invoices totalling $24,631.44. Contractual performance dispute with creditor has caused the
         delayed payment.
Geraldton Port Authority
(a)      17 creditors, invoices totalling $390,391.97
(b)      Nil
(c)      1 creditor, invoices totalling $4,185.68. This amount was in dispute with Patrick Ports. Accounts in
         dispute are not approved for payment until the dispute is resolved. This matter has since been resolved
         and account paid.
(d)      Nil
(e)      8 creditors, invoices totalling $136,146.58 This is made up of 5 held for retention ($61,572.56) 3
         accounts in dispute ($74,574.02). Retention amounts are agreed by both parties to be retained for a
         predetermined time to cover possible product defects etc. The 3 parties in dispute are as follows:-
         •     3-D Marine Mapping - $24,200.00
         •     Main Roads Department - $47,646.58
         •     Toll Transitions - $ 2,727.44
Accounts in dispute are not approved for payment until the dispute is resolved.
East Perth Redevelopment Authority
(a)      35 creditors, invoices totalling $152,949.15
(b)      Nil
(c)      Nil
(d)      Nil
(e)      Nil
Subiaco Redevelopment Authority, Eastern Goldfields Transit Board
(a)      Nil
(b)      Nil
(c)      Nil
(d)      Nil
(e)      Nil
Port Hedland Port Authority
(a)      90 creditors, invoices totalling $9,641,68.76
(b)      6 creditors, invoices totalling $27,140.62
(c)      2 creditors, invoices totalling $647.72
(d)      1 creditor, invoices totalling $397.00
(e)      1 creditor, invoices totalling $43.71
Port Hedland Port Authority had a total of 10 creditors with invoices outstanding past 30 days as
at 30 June 2007. Of these, 7 creditor invoices were misdirected or misplaced within the purchasing and
authorization process and therefore received and entered into the accounting system past the due date. 2 creditors
were late in submitting their invoices, which therefore delayed the input and payment process. 2 invoices were in
dispute as at 30 June 2007 and have now been resolved and subsequently paid.
Bunbury Port Authority
(a)      87 creditors, invoices totalling $872,032.43
(b)      2 creditors, invoices totalling $29,592.08
(c)      0 creditors
(d)      1 creditor, invoices totalling $2,337.50
(e)      0 creditors
In accordance with its Accounting Payable policy the Bunbury Port Authority in most cases promptly pays
invoices within 30 days of receipt of the invoice. This is why the majority of the outstanding invoices are less
than 30 days (87 out of a total of 90).
Of the two invoices that were over 30 days but less than 60, one had to be requested from the supplier as they
had not submitted their invoice and the other was a minor adjustment of $747.08 which required clarification
6204                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

before being paid on 11 July 2007. The invoice that was outstanding for 90-120 days, although
dated 27 March 2007 was not received from the creditor until 28 June 2007 and was paid on 11 July2007.
Dampier Port Authority
(a)      54 creditors, invoices totalling $592,140
(b)      6 creditors, invoices totalling $68,647
(c)      2 creditors, invoices totalling $19,606
(d)      Nil
(e)      4 creditors, invoices totalling $95,977
The Dampier Port Authority makes every effort to pay creditors within 30 days however there are circumstances
under which this is not possible.
Late Billing (b) - Some of our creditors do not submit invoices for more than 30 days after goods or services
have been supplied. The date recorded in the finance system is the date of the invoice - not the date the invoice is
received. Therefore these invoices will appear as outstanding for more than 30 days even if they are paid on the
day they are received.
Accounts in Dispute and Works not yet Performed (e) - These accounts are not approved for payment until the
dispute has been resolved.
Esperance Port Authority
(a)      129 creditors, invoices totalling $2,593,083
(b)      1 creditor, invoices totalling $ 351
(c)      Nil
(d)      Nil
(e)      Nil
Late billing
Some creditors do not submit invoices for more than 30 days after the goods or services are supplied. The date
recorded in the finance system is the date of the invoice (not the date the invoice is received) and therefore such
invoices will appear as outstanding for more than 30 days even if they are paid on the day they are received.
Public Transport Authority
(a)      171 Creditors, invoices totalling $1,963,000
(b)      15 Creditors, invoices totalling $106,000
(c)      7 Creditors, invoices totalling $25,000
(d)      4 Creditors, invoices totalling $323,000
(e)      4 Creditors, invoices totalling $8,000
The Public Transport Authority makes every effort to pay creditors within 30 days, however, for the following
reasons this is not always possible.
Late billing
Some creditors do not submit invoices for more than 30 days after the goods or services are supplied. The date
recorded in the finance system is the date of the invoice (not the date the invoice is received) and therefore such
invoices will appear as outstanding for more than 30 days even if they are paid on the day they are received.
Accounts in dispute
Accounts are not approved for payment until any dispute is resolved.
Misdirected invoices
Payment can be delayed if invoices are incorrectly addressed or sent to the wrong department.
Invoices without Purchase Orders Numbers
When the supplier omits the purchase order number, the invoice is usually sent back to the supplier. When
returned the invoice may still have the original date on it.
Lost invoices
Some invoices are lost in the mail, a duplicate copy is requested from the supplier and the copy of invoice will
have the original date, which usually will be already outstanding for more than 30 days..
             ROADS - DAILY VEHICLE COUNT, LEACH HIGHWAY AND SOUTH STREET
2572.    Mr T.R. Sprigg to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
(1)      Could the Minister advise the official daily vehicle count for Leach Highway and South Street between
         Karel Avenue and North Lake Road?
(2)      What is the percentage of the total of freight traffic, i.e. trucks, on each road?
                                  [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                    6205

Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied:
(1)     The average weekday traffic volume (2006) for Leach Highway between Karel Avenue and North Lake
        Road is 46 325 vehicles per day.
        The average weekday traffic volumes (2006) for South Street between Karel Avenue and North Lake
        Road is 29 100 vehicles per day.
(2)     The percentage of freight traffic (class 3-12 vehicles) on Leach Highway between Karel Avenue and
        North Lake Road is 7.9%. The corresponding figure of South Street is 8.3%.
                HOUSING - STATISTICS ON HOMESWEST PROPERTIES IN BUNBURY
2580.   Mr G.M. Castrilli to the Minister for Housing and Works
(1)     How many homes are currently owned by Homeswest in Bunbury?
(2)     How many homes are currently owned by Homeswest in Bunbury that are tenanted?
(3)     How many homes are currently owned by Homeswest in Bunbury that are vacant?
(4)     Why are each of these properties vacant and for how long has each property been vacant?
(5)     In what suburbs are the above vacant homes located and how many are in each suburb?
(6)     How many people are currently on the Homeswest waiting list for Bunbury?
(7)     How many urgent housing applicants are there on the Homeswest waiting list for Bunbury?
(8)     How many people on the Homeswest waiting list are aged pensioners?
(9)     How many people are on the Homeswest waiting list in the whole South West?
(10)    How many homes were owned by Homeswest in Bunbury in:
        (a)     September 2001;
        (b)     September 2002;
        (c)     September 2003;
        (d)     September 2004;
        (e)     September 2005; and
        (f)     September 2006?
(11)    Of those homes owned by Homeswest in Bunbury in the above years, what is the breakdown for single
        dwellings, aged dwellings and family dwellings?
(12)    How many people are on the Homeswest waiting list in:
        (a)     Perth;
        (b)     Busselton;
        (c)     Manjimup;
        (d)     Collie; and
        (e)     Margaret River?
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:
The Department of Housing and Works advises:
Note: For the purposes of this answer, Bunbury includes Australind, Bunbury, Burekup, Carey Park, Clifton
Park, College Grove, Dalyellup, Davenport, East Bunbury, Eaton, Gelorup, Glen Iris, Pelican Point, Picton,
South Bunbury, Usher, Vittoria, Waterloo, Withers.
(1)     1,128 as at 1 July 2007, including community housing and public housing.
        In the 2007-08 State Budget, the Government announced it would invest $417M over four years in
        social housing and deliver at least 1,000 extra social housing dwellings over the next four years. More
        recently, the Government committed a further $238million for new affordable housing and land
        initiatives enabling a further additional 120 social housing properties to be procured over the next two
        years.
        A further 58 additional social housing properties are planned to commence in Bunbury in 2007-08.
(2)     1,086 as at 31 July 2007 including community housing and public housing.
(3)     42 as at 1 July 2007, including 6 properties which were undergoing standard vacated maintenance for
        prompt allocation.
(4)     The following vacancy times include the time taken to assess the future of each property, carry out
        refurbishments, obtain approvals for any subdivision or strata titling and confirm compliance with any
6206                             [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

       local government regulations and zoning, obtain building approvals, arrangements for properties to be
       put on the market for sale and time on the market. The primary cause of delays has been in the
       completion of refurbishment work due to a shortage of skilled labour in the area.
       Any properties on the market without being sold for more than three months will be considered for
       return to the rental stock for offer to housing applicants. As at 1 July 2007:
       Six properties under general maintenance to prepare for allocation - vacant on average less than seven
       days.
       Two properties listed for sale having been refurbished - vacant on average for 520 days.
       10 properties refurbished and awaiting approval to sell - vacant on average 650 days.
       Four properties being refurbished for retention as rentals - vacant on average 70 days
       13 properties under refurbishment to prepare for sale. Some require subdivision and strata title
       approvals by Council and Landgate - days vacant range from 50 to 420.
       Three properties under assessment for future use - vacant on average 15 days.
       Four properties are being utilised for temporary accommodation for existing tenants while their homes
       are being refurbished.
(5)    Seven in Carey Park;
       25 in Withers;
       Seven in Bunbury;
       One in Australind; and
       Two in Dalyellup.
(6)    468
(7)    12
(8)    145
(9)    1,076, including Augusta, Balingup, Boyanup, Boyup Brook, Bridgetown, Brunswick Junction,
       Bunbury, Busselton, Capel, Collie, Cowaramup, Donnybrook, Dunsborough, Harvey, Manjimup,
       Margaret River, Nannup, Northcliffe, Pemberton, Walpole, Waroona, and Yarloop.
(10)   (a)      1,156
       (b)      1,194
       (c)      1,192
       (d)      1,175
       (e)      1,174
       (f)      1,186
(11)   (a)      Seniors: 297
                Family: 691
                Singles: 39
                Community Housing: 129
       (b)      Seniors: 293
                Family: 687
                Singles: 61
                Community Housing: 153
       (c)      Seniors: 293
                Family: 671
                Singles: 68
                Community Housing: 160
       (d)      Seniors: 307
                Family: 644
                Singles: 68
                Community Housing: 162
       (e)      Seniors: 307
                Family: 629
                Singles: 73
                Community Housing: 165
       (f)      Seniors: 323
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                    6207

                  Family: 601
                  Singles: 73
                  Community Housing: 189
(12)     (a)      11,309
         (b)      300
         (c)      56
         (d)      59
         (e)      50.
                                 ADULTS WITH DYSLEXIA - ASSISTANCE
2620.    Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services; Community Safety; Water
         Resources; Sport and Recreation
(1)      What policies and procedures are in place within each Department and Agency under the Minister’s
         responsibility providing assistance for adults who are unable to read and write at the level they should?
(2)      What assistance is available within the Minister's portfolio for people who have left school with low
         literacy skills due to dyslexia?
(3)      What amount of funding is provided within the Minister's portfolio for policies, programs and research
         to assist people with dyslexia; and
(4)      Who is responsible for these policies, programs and research?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
Department of Water
(1)-(2) The Department of Water (DoW) has developed policies for encouraging and guiding all staff to
        consider people with disabilities and learning difficulties when producing publications. Furthermore,
        the DoW does have a publication/stakeholder management process which is used to determine needs
        and conduits when communicating with key stakeholders. All DoW staff are available to assist the WA
        community in accessing and understanding water policy and water resource issues whether by
        telephone, Internet or in person.
(3)-(4) The DoW does not provide discrete policies, programs and research specific to dyslexia issues or any
        other reading or writing difficulties.
Water Corporation
(1)      The Water Corporation has an Access and Inclusion Policy that aims to ensure that its facilities,
         services, events and information are accessible to all members of the community.
         The Water Corporation has a strategic Disability Access and Inclusion Plan (2006/2010) that provides a
         framework for identifying the barriers that people may face, including literacy and language
         difficulties. This is supported by an Internal Action Plan, which details the actions being taken each
         year to mitigate or eliminate these barriers and improve access to the Water Corporation's services,
         facilities and events.
         Both plans are available          to   the   public   on    the   Water    Corporation's    website    at
         www.watercorporation.com.au.
         "CommUnicate" is a program designed to improve the quality of the Water Corporation's written
         correspondence to its customers. Low literacy/numeracy was a key consideration in the development of
         this program, which incorporates the use of plain language, and no technical jargon etc.
(2)      The Water Corporation does not provide any direct assistance to people who have left school with low
         literacy levels due to dyslexia.
(3)      The Water Corporation does not allocate any specific funding to assist people with dyslexia. Any
         actions and initiatives are undertaken as part of normal business within existing operational budgets.
(4)      The Water Corporation's General Manager, Customer Services.
Busselton Water
(1)-(3) Nil
(4)      Not applicable
Aqwest
(1)-(3) Nil
(4)      Not applicable
6208                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

WA Police
(1)-(2) The WA Police Disability Access and Inclusion Plan 2007-2012 refers to people with disabilities and
        does not specifically refer to dyslexia. Assistance to members of the public attending police stations can
        be provided on a needs basis. The WA Police Internet site also enables members of the public to
        download a range of forms where they can seek their own assistance in completing.
(3)      Nil
(4)      Not applicable
Fire and Emergency Services Authority
(1)      There are no specific policies and procedures in place providing assistance for adults who are unable to
         read and write however, FESA has a number of audio visual resources that can be used to educate
         members of the community on hazards such as home fire safety, bush fires, floods and cyclones.
(2)-(3) Nil
(4)      Not applicable.
Fire and Emergency Services Superannuation Board
(1)-(3) Nil
(4)      Not applicable
Department of Sport and Recreation
(1)      The method of assistance provided is based on the content to be delivered, clients' needs and area of
         operation.
(2)-(4) See answer 1
WA Sports Centre Trust
(1)-(3) Nil
(4)      Not applicable
WA Institute of Sport
(1)-(3) Nil
(4)      Not applicable
Office of Road Safety
The Office of Road Safety is part of the Department of the Premier and Cabinet (DPC) for all administrative
issues.
As such, the Office of Road Safety's response to this question will be included as part of the DPC response.
Office of Crime Prevention
The Office of Crime Prevention's response will be included as part of the WA Police response.
                                 ADULTS WITH DYSLEXIA - ASSISTANCE
2625.    Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan to the Minister for Education and Training; South West
(1)      What policies and procedures are in place within each Department and Agency under the Minister’s
         responsibility providing assistance for adults who are unable to read and write at the level they should?
(2)      What assistance is available within the Minister's portfolio for people who have left school with low
         literacy skills due to dyslexia?
(3)      What amount of funding is provided within the Minister's portfolio for policies, programs and research
         to assist people with dyslexia; and
(4)      Who is responsible for these policies, programs and research?
Mr M. McGOWAN replied:
Curriculum Council
(1)      No formal policies and procedures in place.
(2)      If issue identified through performance management or an employees desire to work at higher levels
         specific support would be provided.
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6209

(3)     Senior school courses are written to ensure students with learning disabilities can gain extra
        support. Special arrangements are provided to students with specific learning disabilities such as
        dyslexia for the TEE/WACE examinations. The cost of this provision is approximately $8,000.
(4)     Not applicable.
South West Development Commission
(1)     The South West Development Commission has a performance development system in place that
        identifies training and development needs.
(2)     The Commission can refer staff to specific programs if required.
(3)     No specific funding is provided. Funding is included in the training budget which is $70 500.
(4)     Chief Executive Officer
Department of Education and Training
(1)     The Department of Education and Training provides funding to Registered Training Organisations to
        provide assistance to adults who are unable to read and write at the level they should. A substantial
        proportion of the Department's training delivery funds (5.8%) is related to activities for adults with poor
        reading and writing skills.
        The Department of Education and Training provides funding under the following arrangements:
        •   The TAFEWA Delivery and Performance Agreements
        •   The Competitively Allocated Training (CAT) program (whereby non-TAFE RTOs can access
            funding to deliver basic education courses)
        •   User Choice Agreements, and
        •   Special Purpose funding for the management and training of volunteers in the Read Write Now!
            program.
(2)     Services to adults with poor reading and writing skills include:
        •   formal classes delivering accredited literacy and numeracy courses (such as the Certificates in
            General Education for Adults)
        •   in-course support for apprentices, trainees and other students enrolled in vocational qualifications,
            and
        •   non-accredited, informal, one-to-one tutorial services delivered by volunteers.
        All adults who are Australian residents are able to access the literacy and numeracy courses and
        programs funded by the Department of Education and Training. There are no course fees for these
        programs. No distinction is made between people who have poor reading and writing skills and those
        who identify as dyslexic.
(3)     In 2006, the Department of Education and Training funded 1.62 million Student Curriculum Hours
        (SCH) for language, literacy and numeracy courses at a cost of $15.9 million.
(4)     The State Training Board oversees the work of the Department of Education and Training in producing
        a State Training Plan and allocating training funds under the State Training Profile. Regulatory
        requirements for the delivery of training are agreed nationally under the auspices of the Ministerial
        Council for Vocational Training and Education. The Department of Education and Training does not
        provide funding to conduct research into dyslexia in adults.
Department of Education Services
(1)     No formal policies and procedures in place.
(2)     If issues identified through performance management or an employees desire to work at higher levels,
        specific support would be provided.
(3)     No funds are appropriated to the Department for these purposes.
(4)     Not applicable.
                                ADULTS WITH DYSLEXIA - ASSISTANCE
2628.   Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan to the Minister for Corrective Services; Small Business; Minister Assisting the
        Minister for Federal-State Relations
(1)     What policies and procedures are in place within each Department and Agency under the Minister’s
        responsibility providing assistance for adults who are unable to read and write at the level they should?
6210                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

(2)      What assistance is available within the Minister's portfolio for people who have left school with low
         literacy skills due to dyslexia?
(3)      What amount of funding is provided within the Minister's portfolio for policies, programs and research
         to assist people with dyslexia; and
(4)      Who is responsible for these policies, programs and research?
Ms M.M. QUIRK replied:
Corrective Services
(1)      The Education and Vocational Training Unit's Adult Basic Education Policy, objective one, "To
         provide all offenders who have low literacy/numeracy skills with the opportunity to acquire such skills
         and thereby enhance their level of functional ability, self-expression and self-esteem and therefore their
         employability."
(2)      Advice on strategies to assist with teaching techniques for prisoners with specific learning difficulties,
         such as Dyslexia, is available to teachers via the Coordinator Adult Basic Education.
(3)      No specific funding is allocated to Dyslexia.
(4)      N/A
Office of the Inspector of Custodial Services
(1)      Under the Office's Disability Access and Inclusion Plan (DAIP) there are provisions, which provide
         assistance to people with literacy difficulties who are unable to read the Inspectorate's reports. As our
         reports are available in PDF format it is possible for audio software to read aloud the wording in each
         report.
(2)      N/A
(3)      N/A
(4)      N/A
SBDC
(1)      The Small Business Development Corporation (SBDC) does not have in place any specific policies or
         procedures to provide assistance for adults who are unable to read and write at the level they should.
(2)      The SBDC does not provide assistance for people who have left school with low literacy skills due to
         dyslexia.
(3)      The SBDC does not provide funding for policies, programs or research to assist people with dyslexia.
(4)      Not applicable.
Federal-State Relations
The answer will be forthcoming from the Minister for Federal-State Relations.

                                 DONNYBROOK DISTRICT HIGH SCHOOL
2644.    Dr S.C. Thomas to the Premier
(1)      Has the Premier ever visited the Donnybrook District High School; and
         (a)      if so, what were the Premier’s comments in regard to the school toilets and the design and
                  technology and arts facilities; and
         (b)      did the Premier give an undertaking to improve those facilities?
(2)      Has the Government made any improvements to those facilities since December 2006?
(3)      Has the Government committed to improving any of these facilities in the near future; and
         (a)      if so, what is that commitment?
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied:
(1)      Yes, from memory a general discussion prior about the school's facilities was held prior to the 2001
         State election but no firm undertaking would have been given.
(2)-(3) A feasibility study of the toilets was completed in November 2006. The school has been listed as a high
        priority for consideration in the 2007-2008 Toilet Upgrade Program.
                                 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                    6211

                                  HOUSING - FIRST START PROGRAM
2654.   Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Housing and Works
Could the Minister answer the following questions in the same format as the answer to Question on Notice
No. 2238, I ask for the 3 months ending 30 June 2007:
(1)     How many Western Australians in the following regions applied for the First Start program:
        (a)      North Metropolitan;
        (b)      South Metropolitan;
        (c)      East Metropolitan;
        (d)      Mining and Pastoral; and
        (e)      Agricultural?
(2)     How many Western Australians in the following South West Local Government Shires applied for the
        First Start program:
        (a)      Bunbury;
        (b)      Busselton;
        (c)      Capel;
        (d)      Augusta/Margaret River; and
        (e)      Manjimup?
(3)     How many Western Australians in the following regions have been accepted for the First Start program:
        (a)      North Metropolitan;
        (b)      South Metropolitan;
        (c)      East Metropolitan;
        (d)      Mining and Pastoral; and
        (e)      Agricultural?
(4)     How many Western Australians in the following South West Local Government Shires have been
        accepted for the First Start program:
        (a)      Bunbury;
        (b)      Busselton;
        (c)      Capel;
        (d)      Augusta/Margaret River; and
        (e)      Manjimup?
(5)     What is the total amount of First Start program loans the Government has committed to in each of the
        following regions:
        (a)      North Metropolitan;
        (b)      East Metropolitan;
        (c)      South Metropolitan;
        (d)      Mining and Pastoral; and
        (e)      Agricultural?
(6)     What is the total amount of First Start program loans the Government has committed to in each of the
        following South West Local Government Shires:
        (a)      Bunbury;
        (b)      Busselton;
        (c)      Capel;
        (d)      Augusta/Margaret River; and
        (e)      Manjimup?
(7)     What is the rate of interest being charged by the Government for the First Start program loans?
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:
The Department of Housing and Works has advised:
The following information pertains to the months April, May, June 2007 as at 30 June 2007:
(1)
        (a)      North Metropolitan         523
        (b)      South Metropolitan         203
        (c)      East Metropolitan          277
        (d)      Mining and Pastoral        27
        (e)      Agricultural               53
6212                              [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

(2)
        (a)      Bunbury                     20
        (b)      Busselton                   7
        (c)      Capel                       0
        (d)      Augusta/Margaret River      6
        (e)      Manjimup                    4
(3)
        (a)      North Metropolitan          113
        (b)      South Metropolitan          48
        (c)      East Metropolitan           66
        (d)      Mining and Pastoral         4
        (e)      Agricultural                8
        NB: Accepted has been defined as pre-approved for a loan.
(4)
        (a)      Bunbury                     6
        (b)      Busselton                   3
        (c)      Cape                        l0
        (d)      Augusta/Margaret River      0
        (e)      Manjimup                    0
        NB: Accepted has been defined as pre-approved for a loan.
(5)                                          Keystart $M    DHW $M           TOTAL $M
        (a)      North Metropolitan          19.9           13.3             33.2
        (b)      East Metropolitan           7.6            5.0              12.6
        (c)      South Metropolitan          11.3           7.5              18.8
        (d)      Mining and Pastoral         0.6            0.4              1.0
        (e)      Agriculture                 1.1            0.7              1.8
(6)                                          Keystart $M    DHW $M           TOTAL $M
        (a)      Bunbury                     1.0            0.6              1.6
        (b)      Busselton                   0.6            0.4              1.0
        (c)      Capel                       0              0                0
        (d)      Augusta/Margaret River      0              0                0
        (e)      Manjimup                    0              0                0
(7)     Interest rate is standard Keystart rate of 7.99%.
        As the launch of First Start has broken new ground, its implementation is being closely monitored. To
        ensure the target of helping 3,000 families over the next three years to own their first home can be
        achieved, the income eligibility levels for First Start were raised from August 1 this year. The new
        income limits are $70,000 for families, $60,000 for couples; and $43,000 for singles..
                      HOUSING - GOODSTART SHARED EQUITY LOAN SCHEME
2655.   Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Housing and Works
Could the Minister answer the following questions in the same format as the answer to Question on Notice
No. 2248, I ask for the three months to (a) 31 March 2007 and (b) 30 June 2007:
(1)     How many applications were received for participation in the Goodstart Shared Equity Loan Scheme?
(2)     How many applicants were approved for participation in the Goodstart Shared Equity Loan Scheme?
(3)     What was the average value of the properties approved as part of the Goodstart Shared Equity Loan
        Scheme?
(4)     What was the value of the highest value property approved as part of the Goodstart Shared Equity Loan
        Scheme?
(5)     What was the average value of the property shares purchased as part of the Goodstart Shared Equity
        Loan Scheme?
(6)     What was the average percentage of the property share purchased as part of the Goodstart Shared
        Equity Loan Scheme?
(7)     How many participants have left the Goodstart Shared Equity Loan Scheme?
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6213

Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:
The Department of Housing and Works has advised:
(1)      (a)      26                (b)      20
(2)      (a)      18                (b)      12
(3)      (a)      $328,556          (b)      $341,875
(4)      (a)      $400,000          (b)      $440,000
(5)      The following values indicate purchasers' equity only:
         (a)      $197,650          (b)      $221,642
(6)      (a)      60%               (b)      64%
(7)      Clients left the scheme for various reasons including the property being sold, refinancing in the private
         sector, refinancing to a Keystart loan and buying out all the Department's equity:
         (a)      18                         (b)      30
        SPEED CAMERA INFRINGEMENTS - MOTORCYCLISTS PHOTOGRAPHED FROM REAR
2670.    Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services
(1)      When did the police start using cameras that record the rear number plates of speeding motorcyclists?
(2)      Since then:
         (a)      how many motorcyclists have been photographed in this way;
         (b)      of these, how many have been sent infringement notices;
         (c)      of these, how many have paid the infringement fine; and
         (d)      of those who received infringement notices but have not paid the fines, how many are
                  estimated never to pay the infringement fine and why?
(3)      What owner-onus law or regulation gives the police the power to prosecute a motorcyclist
         photographed from the rear; and
                  (i)      if such an owner-onus provision exists, does it apply also to drivers of other vehicles;
                           and
                  (ii)     if no such owner-onus provision exists, how do police enforce the payment of
                           infringements by motorcyclists caught speeding by cameras photographing from the
                           rear?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
Western Australia Police advise that they are currently researching the use of dual camera systems to assist with
the securing of photographic evidence relating to speeding motorcyclists. Combined with the owner onus
legislation, the identification of speeding motorcyclists will allow Police to prosecute motorcycle owners or the
other rider nominated.
(1)      There is no special camera to record the rear number plate of motor cyclists; the existing speed cameras
         are capable of being operated in receding mode so they are effectively turned around. WA Police have
         used cameras in this manner since speed cameras were introduced into Western Australia in 1988.
(2)      Therefore the data for this question would take a significant amount of time to collate. The
         Commissioner of Police has advised he is not prepared to divert valuable resources away from core
         policing activities to provide a response.
(3)      Sections 58, 58A and 102 of the Road Traffic Act 1974 vests the responsibility on the 'responsible
         person' for a vehicle (whether private citizen or company) to identify the driver of that vehicle and to
         put things in place to ensure they are able to do so. Photographic images provided on Traffic
         Infringement Notices are not required under current legislation and are provided by WA Police as a
         courtesy.
                                            YARLOOP HOSPITAL
2675.    Dr K.D. Hames to the Minister for Health
(1)      What services are still operating at Yarloop Hospital?
(2)      What maintenance or upgrades have been undertaken in the last few months and what was the cost of
         this work?
6214                              [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

(3)     How many staff are still based in the Yarloop Hospital site and what are their roles?
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
(1)     The services operating at the Yarloop Community Health Centre are:
        -        Registered nurse service - 8am - 4pm Monday - Friday.
        -        Visiting allied health services (most are fortnightly) - child health, social work, occupational
                 therapy, health promotion and speech therapy.
        -        Day Centre - 2 days per week.
        -        General Practitioner services - 2 hours per week.
        -        Needle Syringe Program - dispensing 8am - 4pm Monday - Friday.
(2)     The maintenance and upgrades, to the value of $50,000, that have been undertaken in the last few
        months include:
        -        The Security system has been upgraded.
        -        The old hospital kitchen has been decommissioned and an area in the main part of the facility
                 has been converted to a new kitchen area.
        -        The boiler service has been decommissioned.
        -        The interior walls have been repainted.
        -        The installation of partitioning with door access, fitted along corridors to improve
                 environmental control.
        -        The relocation of the existing split system air-conditioner to the main corridor.
        -        Minor works and air conditioning of the former Doctor's Surgery/Day Centre prior to handover
                 to the Yarloop community's Telecentre.
(3)     The number of staff and their roles at the Yarloop Community Health Centre are as follows:
        -        A registered nurse providing practice nurse (for the General Practitioner) services, Day Centre
                 assistance, coordination of centre, health promotion, the Needle Syringe Program and general
                 administrative duties.
        -        Support services of cleaning and gardening - 3 days per week.
        -        Day Centre staff - 1 registered nurse and 1 enrolled nurse both work 2 days per
                 week. Facilitation of crafts, games and outings, serving meals, general day care nursing of the
                 elderly day care clients.
                                      POLICE STATIONS - CLOSURE
2676.   Mr P.D. Omodei to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services
(1)     Is the responsibility for deploying police solely that of the Police Commissioner?
(2)     Can the Minister explain the decision to close six stations recently, given that the Commissioner gave
        an undertaking in 2005 that there would be no closures of police stations?
(3)     Does the Government, the Minister or the Police Commissioner have any plans for the closure of any
        further police stations in Western Australia?
(4)     Is the Minister aware of Recommendation 62 of the 2003 Government Function Review Taskforce,
        relating to the closure of 22 nominated police stations, and the intention of the Police Commissioner to
        follow through on that recommendation?
(5)     Does the Government’s endorsement of the Functional Review Taskforce recommendations constitute a
        direction to the Police Commissioner to close a number of Western Australian Police Stations?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
(1)     The Commissioner of Police is responsible for the allocation of police services state-wide and allocates
        resources accordingly.
(2)     Six country stations were closed and a seventh relocated after an extensive review of police resource
        allocation in regional WA. WA Police undertake continual monitoring to determine the ongoing
        demand for policing services in each Police district and to ensure responsive policing service is
        provided to the areas of greatest need. Individual police stations are also subject to workload reviews on
        a regular basis to ensure available resources have been appropriately allocated.
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                    6215

(3)      Neither the Government or the Minister have any plans to close police stations. The Police
         Commissioner has informed the Minister he has no plans to close police stations.
(4)      Yes.
(5)      No. The Commissioner of Police is responsible for the allocation of police services state-wide and
         allocates resources accordingly.
AGRICULTURE - SALEYARDS AT MUCHEA, MIDLAND AND IN REGIONAL WESTERN AUSTRALIA
2677.    Mr G. Snook to the Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for Agriculture and Food
I refer to the issue of saleyards in Western Australia, and ask:
         (a)      why has the Minister refused a Freedom of Information application made on 27 February 2007
                  for a copy of “The Review of Saleyard Options/GHD Consultancy Report of the Muchea
                  Saleyards”, dated October 2006;
         (b)      will the Minister now table the report, and
                  (i)       if not, why not;
         (c)      can the Minister advise construction progress of the Muchea Saleyards;
         (d)      will the Minister provide a construction timetable for the Muchea Saleyards, and
                  (i)       if not why not;
         (e)      has there been a recent review of the design of the Muchea Saleyards plan, and
                  (i)       if so, what has been altered from the last agreed design;
         (f)      what was the original estimated cost of the saleyards;
         (g)      will the Minister provide a current cost of the saleyards, and
                  (i)       if not, why not;
         (h)      can the Minister advise the estimated value of the Midland Saleyard complex;
         (i)      will funds from the sale of the Midland Saleyards be quarantined and redirected to upgrade and
                  improve community saleyards in regional Western Australia;
         (j)      what are the reasons behind the extremely high cost of the Muchea Saleyards when other
                  States with much higher stock throughput figures have provided saleyards at a fraction of the
                  cost;
         (k)      what specialised services are being made available to explain the high cost of the saleyards;
         (l)      what other available options were considered for a centralised saleyard complex, and
                  (i)       if so, will the Minister provide details, and
                  (ii)      if not, why not;
         (m)      as a result of the sale of the Midland Saleyards, what funds will be available to upgrade and
                  improve regional facilities at Katanning, Mt Barker and Boyanup;
         (n)      is a new regional saleyard complex at Kemerton being considered as a long term solution, and
                  (i)       if not, why not;
         (o)      given that WorkSafe have issued over 60 work order improvement notices to operators of
                  saleyards at Serpentine, Brunswick, Manjimup, Bridgetown and Shark Lake, what action does
                  the Minister intend to take to ensure these yards remain operational as saleyards or transit
                  depots;
         (p)      given that costs associated with undertaking the improvements to satisfy the Occupational
                  Safety and Health Act 1984 could amount to over $1 million, what action is proposed by the
                  Minister to ensure WorkSafe notices are necessary;
         (q)      what are the implications and consequences of these improvement notices to the agricultural
                  industry and specifically to the live stock industry;
         (r)      will the Minister support an application from the Western Australian Livestock Salesmen’s
                  Association for Government funds to cover the improvement notices imposed by WorkSafe,
                  given the industry’s outstanding safety record; and
         (s)      can the Minster advise what interim measures are in place to replace these community
                  saleyards which may be forced to close?
6216                           [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Mr M.P. WHITELY replied:
       (a)    The Minister's office did not receive this Freedom of Information Application. The Freedom of
              Information Application was directed to the Department of Agriculture and Food.
              The Member sought a copy of the Review of Saleyard Options which includes the GHD
              Consultancy Report on the Muchea Saleyards, dated October 2006 from the Department of
              Agriculture and Food. The report is not a public document and was prepared by the
              Department of Agriculture and Food to assist Cabinet's deliberations relating to the Midland
              Saleyard Relocation Project. The report provides detailed financial information that is
              considered to be of a commercial nature by the Western Australian Meat Industry Authority.
              This commercial information includes the forecast trading position of the proposed Muchea
              facility, information on construction cost estimates and land valuations for elements of the
              project that have yet to progress to tender. Public release of this information at this time could
              have a negative impact on tenders for construction and returns from land sales.
              Therefore in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 1992 exemption is claimed
              under Schedule 1 Clause 10. Subclause (4).
       (b)    No.
       (c)    Expressions of interest for the construction and the fabrication of the gates, panels and rails
              were advertised on 12 September and 19 September 2007. This closes 10 October 2007. This
              process will allow for interested parties to be identified and then vetted. Tenders will then be
              sought from suitable parties.
       (d)    Cut and fill of the 16 ha site will be completed before Christmas 2007.
              Construction will commence early 2008 and is scheduled for completion by the end of 2008.
       (e)    Yes
              (i)      The review is in the final stages of reporting and is not available at this time. The
                       basis of the review was to find (1) cost savings and (2) modify design to streamline
                       operational flow and labour efficiency.
       (f)    In October 2003 Government provided in-principle approval for relocation of the Midland
              Saleyard to the Muchea area. At that time the estimated cost was $13.4m.
              Cost estimates since 2003 have increased dramatically. Let me provide you with some detail.
              The Western Australian Meat Industry Authority (WAMIA) carried out Stage One of the
              project and reassessed the expected costs and returns. Selection of a specific site at Muchea
              was also carried out to enable initial environmental assessment to ensure that there are no fatal
              flaws. The Stage One report identified cost estimates in the order of $16m could be funded by
              the sale of the Authority's existing land holdings.
              In August 2004 Cabinet endorsed progression to stage two of the relocation project. Stage
              Two involved design of the facility, site investigations at Muchea and preparation of the
              Midland and Hazelmere land for sale. This unfortunately took longer than expected as 38
              conditions placed on the development resulted in delays in achieving Development Approval
              and Environmental Protection Authority clearance. By September 2006 cost estimates had
              escalated dramatically to over $30 million. The Stage Two investigations revealed major
              increases in expected site costs at Muchea. These include additional road costs and earth works
              costs. Cost increases also resulted from an increase in saleyard pen sizes in response to new
              animal welfare standards and as a result of construction cost escalation.
              The cost increases were independently reviewed and were not considered to be extraordinary
              for livestock saleyards in the recent overheated construction market where steel, labour and
              overall construction costs have escalated.
       (g)    The current cost will be known when tenders are submitted.
       (h)    The full value of the Midland saleyard complex will not be known until the Midland saleyard
              site is vacated and sold. Current income estimates will cover relocation costs to Muchea and
              also provide for some assistance to the primary regional saleyards.
       (i)    ln December last year Government recognised the deteriorating state of the regional livestock
              saleyards and adjusted the relocation project to provide wider support to the saleyard
              sector. Surplus funds from the sale of the Midland land will be used for an assistance package
              for the primary regional livestock saleyards.
                       [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                    6217

(j)   I am not aware if saleyards in the eastern states that have been recently constructed, provide
      similar features to the Muchea proposal and have been constructed at a fraction of the cost for
      similar throughput levels.
      The Western Australian Meat industry Authority considers that cost estimates for interstate
      yards of similar capacity may be in the order of $18 million. It is important to note however
      that this estimate is for yards still in planning stages.
      I believe there has been rapid escalation in cost estimates for some saleyards on the drawing
      board in the eastern states. For example:
      In August 2002 development costs of $6 million were forecast for a new Livestock Exchange
      near Blayney in the central west of New South Wales. 2005 estimates were of $16m. This is
      close to a threefold increase (2.7) in cost estimates over four years.
      Another example is Bathurst Regional Council's budget estimates for redeveloping their
      saleyards. I believe these increased from $11 million in July 2005 to $22 million in
      August 2006. That is cost estimates doubled in a year. Even the $11 million estimate was an
      increase over earlier estimates due to factors including improved environmental measures,
      increase in steel prices, changed roof design, and previously un-costed items such as
      pavements. Bathurst saleyard has less that 30% of the value of stock passing through it than
      expected for the Muchea facility. I believe Bathurst Council will now expect to close the
      facility
      A more accurate indication of interstate costs is to look at completed yards that offer similar
      quality standards to those proposed for the Muchea facility. For example the Forbes livestock
      selling centre in New South Wales was completed in March 2006 for a total cost of
      approximately $12 million ($10 million capital cost plus land). The facility was developed on a
      green field site and provides state of the art features comparable to those expected of the
      Muchea facility. The facility is a cattle selling complex only and was designed for throughput
      of approximately 65,000 animals per year; whereas Muchea is a combined cattle and sheep
      facility designed for annual throughput of 100,000 cattle and 800,000 sheep. The capital cost
      per unit throughput would be about the same for Forbes and Muchea
(k)   The saleyard provides state of the art features and provides superior stock management, animal
      welfare, and occupational health and safety services.
      One high cost key feature is roofing of the yards for client and animal welfare. This also
      improves environmental management and enables water harvesting and recycling. Higher
      capital costs also result from features that provide operating efficiency and improved
      safety. For example the saleyard will have the latest in electronic recording and use
      remote controlled hydraulics in cattle drafts to improve animal and worker safety.
(l)   Separate cattle and sheep facilities were considered however industry rejected this option as
      significantly inferior to a combined species facility.
      (i)      I have asked proponents of alternative options to engage the key industry bodies in
               developing and assessing their proposals. Support has remained for a combined
               facility at Muchea.
               As late as May this year I have kept the door open for the Shire of Northam to provide
               a viable alternative. I urged the Northam proponents to discuss their proposal with a
               number of key user and industry groups however there was an absence of
               demonstrated support for their proposal.
(m)   Land sales have not been finalised, so the specific level of assistance funding is not known at
      this time. As I have said previously, Government has already identified that regional livestock
      saleyards are seeking support and agreed that funding would be available to assist strategically
      located saleyards.
      This funding is expected to be substantial and in the order of several million dollars however
      this assistance will only be a proportion of the capital required for new regional saleyards.
      Government will provide assistance however at the end of the day regional saleyard businesses
      are the responsibility of the commercial sector.
(n)   Yes.
(o)   Serpentine, Manjimup, Bridgetown, Brunswick and Shark Lake are privately operated. Like
      any private enterprise, the operators need to make a commercial decision on expenditure of
6218                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

                  funds for improvements and maintenance. It could well be that throughput at these smaller
                  yards no longer provides sufficient return to support their continued operation.
                  The 2006 State Saleyard Strategy identified that small saleyards would come under increasing
                  commercial pressure and forecast rationalisation into a small number of larger regional
                  facilities.
         (p)      Let me point out that all businesses including stockyard owners and controllers have a
                  responsibility to provide a safe working environment, to carry out risk assessments, and
                  implement controls to eliminate or reduce the risks of hazards.
                  I arranged a meeting in February this year between the WorkSafe Commissioner and the
                  Western Australian Livestock Salesman's Association (WALSA) to build a shared
                  understanding of the WorkSafe issues and a sensible approach to addressing these in livestock
                  saleyards. WALSA was offered the opportunity to provide a strategic and staged approach to
                  implementing necessary improvements.
         (q)      I expect that necessary expenditure to ensure safe work places will be one of many factors
                  influencing business decisions about the future operation of saleyards. As I have said the 2006
                  State Saleyard Strategy identified that small saleyards would come under increasing
                  commercial pressure and forecast rationalisation into a small number of larger regional
                  facilities. I expect there will also be some acceleration of the shift to other selling pathways,
                  such as direct contract selling.
         (r)      The Western Australian Livestock Salesman's Association runs a number of selling facilities as
                  commercial businesses and needs to take responsibility for safety requirements.
                  Any funding assistance will be targeted to assist with the development of strategically placed
                  regional saleyards that can deliver efficient and safe services to the livestock sector.
         (s)      Expenditure of public funds to prop up unviable small yards is not a responsible use of tax
                  payers' funds. .
                                       POLICE VEHICLES - MILEAGE
2679.    Mr M.J. Cowper to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services
(1)      As of 14 August 2007, how many kilometres has police vehicle KG102 travelled?
(2)      When was or will this vehicle be changed over?
(3)      How many kilometres did this vehicle travel when it changed over?
(4)      How many other vehicles have travelled in excess of 80,000 kilometres in the past year?
(5)      How many vehicles have travelled in excess of 100,000 kilometres in the past year?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
(1)-(3) KG102 refers to the call-sign of the vehicle and indicates the location and function of the vehicle rather
        than the registration of the vehicle. The vehicle with the call sign KG102 on 14 August 2007
        was 1CCS529 and this vehicle has been operational since 10 August 2007. On 14 August 2007 this
        vehicle had travelled 706 kilometres.
         The previous vehicle with the KG102 call-sign was 1CNM745 and travelled 80,348 kilometres. It was
         initially commissioned on a 36 month/60,000 km lease term based on the travel undertaken by the
         previous vehicle. The lease was due to expire on 15 August 2009 however a change in
         deployment/utilisation has resulted in the 60,000 kilometre threshold being reached 22 months ahead of
         the lease expiry. The new vehicle (1CCS529) commissioned on 10th August 2007 has a six (6) month
         lease term.
(4)      7. Of the seven (7) vehicles that have travelled in excess of 80,000 kilometres in the past year, five (5)
         of these vehicles are attached to Traffic Escort Section. Four (4) of these vehicles have already been
         replaced and the fifth will be replaced shortly.
         Of the remaining two (2) vehicles to have travelled in excess of 80,000 kilometres in the past year, one
         had a replacement ordered on 22 March 2007 and will be commissioned on 30 September 2007 on a
         twelve (12) month lease.
         The remaining vehicle had a replacement ordered on 18 April 2007 and will be commissioned shortly
         on a six (6) month lease.
(5)      Nil.
                                 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                   6219

      FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES - FIRE APPLIANCES - NUMBER, LOCATION, MILEAGE,
                                 AIR CONDITIONING
2680.   Mr M.J. Cowper to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services
(1)     How many fire appliances are in service with the Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) in Western Australia?
(2)     How many fire appliances are in service with the Bush Fire Brigade (BFB) in Western Australia?
(3)     Where are these appliances in service?
(4)     How many of these appliances have in excess if 100,000 kilometres on the odometer?
(5)     How many have done in excess of 200,000 kilometres?
(6)     How many have done in excess of 300,000 kilometres?
(7)     How many of these vehicles do not have airconditioning in the cabs?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
(1)     The Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) has 332 appliances.
(2)     Bush Fire Brigades (BFB) have 634 appliances.
(3)     Location of Fire and Rescue Service firefighting appliances as at 18 September 2007 (in alphabetical
        order)
        ALBANY                             LAVERTON
        ARMADALE                           LEONORA
        AUGUSTA                            MADDINGTON
        BALLIDU                            MALAGA
        BASSENDEAN                         MANDURAH
        BELMONT                            MANJIMUP
        BEVERLEY                           MARGARET RIVER
        BOYUP BROOK                        MEEKATHARRA
        BRIDGETOWN                         MERREDIN
        BROOKTON                           MIDLAND
        BROOME                             MOORA
        BRUNSWICK JUNCTION                 MOUNT BARKER
        BUNBURY                            MOUNT MAGNET
        BUSSELTON                          MULLEWA
        BUTLER                             MUNDARING
        CANNING VALE                       MURDOCH
        CARNARVON                          NANNUP
        CHRISTMAS ISLAND                   NARROGIN
        CLAREMONT                          NEWMAN
        COCOS (HOME) ISLAND                NORSEMAN
        COCOS (WEST) ISLAND                NORTHAM
        COLLIE                             NORTHAMPTON
        COOLGARDIE                         NORTHCLIFFE
        CORRIGIN                           O'CONNOR
        CUE                                ONSLOW
        CUNDERDIN                          OSBORNE PARK
        DAGLISH                            PEMBERTON
        DALWALLINU                         PERTH
        DAMPIER                            PINGELLY
        DENHAM                             PINJARRA
        DENMARK                            PORT HEDLAND
        DERBY                              QUAIRADING
        DONGARA                            RAVENSTHORPE
        DONNYBROOK                         ROCKINGHAM
        DUMBLEYUNG                         ROEBOURNE
        DUNCRAIG                           ROLEYSTONE
        DUNSBOROUGH                        SECRET HARBOUR
        EATON/AUSTRALIND                   SOUTH HEDLAND
        ESPERANCE                          SOUTHERN CROSS
        EXMOUTH                            SUCCESS
        FALCON                             TAMMIN
6220                              [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

        FORRESTFIELD                        TOODYAY
        FREMANTLE                           WAGIN
        GERALDTON                           WALPOLE
        GINGIN                              WANGARA
        GOOMALLING                          WAROONA
        GUILDFORD                           WELSHPOOL
        HARVEY                              WICKHAM
        HOPE VALLEY                         WILLIAMS
        JOONDALUP                           WONGAN HILLS
        JURIEN BAY                          WUNDOWIE
        KALAMUNDA                           WYALKATCHEM
        KALBARRI                            WYNDHAM
        KALGOORLIE                          YANCHEP
        KAMBALDA                            YORK
        KARRATHA
        KATANNING
        KELLERBERRIN
        KENSINGTON
        KOJONUP
        KULIN
        KUNUNURRA
        KWINANA
        LAKE GRACE
        LANCELIN
        There are 677 BFB's registered with 117 local governments throughout the State. The 634 BFB
        appliances are located across 377 local government brigades with the other 257 brigades being farmer
        response/pastoral or local government registered groups.
        In relation to questions 4 to 7 below, the following information is provided.
        It should be noted that BFB appliances are owned by local government and not FESA. Whilst FESA
        holds data related to the age of a BFB appliance it does not have data in relation to how many
        kilometres an appliance has travelled or whether an appliance has air-conditioning. (This information
        may be available from local government via the Minister for Local Government). FESA's maximum age
        guidelines suggest that Tankers are due to be replaced at 16 years while replacement age for Light
        Tankers is 10 years. However, some older vehicles may have low kilometres, be in good condition,
        remain fit for purpose, and remain safe to operate, and therefore may not need to be replaced. The
        service capability of these vehicles is continuously monitored.
        Over 60% of the BFB fire fighting fleet (389 of 634 vehicles) has been replaced with new or
        refurbished tankers in the 5 years since the introduction of the Emergency Services Levy. Only 15% of
        the fleet remains over age compared with 32% (over 200 vehicles) 5 years ago.
(4)     The number of appliances that have in excess of 100,000 kilometres on the odometer:
        FRS      46
        BFB      Data not available
(5)     The number of appliances that have done in excess of 200,000 kilometres:
        FRS      18
        BFB      Data not available
(6)     The number of appliances that have done in excess of 300,000 kilometres:
        FRS      4
        BFB      Data not available
(7)     The number of vehicles without air conditioning in the cabs:
        FRS      70
        BFB      Data not available
                 ROAD CRASHES RESULTING IN FATALITIES OR SERIOUS INJURIES
2681.   Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan to the Minister for Community Safety
I refer to Legislative Assembly question on notice No. 2407, and ask:
        (a)      does the Western Australian Police Service provide details of the causes of all fatal and serious
                 injury traffic crashes to the Office of Road Safety;
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6221

        (b)      will the Minister list all the possible causes of traffic crashes;
        (c)      what does the Office of Road Safety do with this information about the cause of each fatal or
                 serious injury traffic crash;
        (d)      why is this information not included in the annual publication titled “Reported Road Crashes
                 in WA” in a way so that readers can determine the proportion of fatal and serious traffic
                 crashes attributable to each cause;
        (e)      does the Office of Road Safety collate or record the number of fatal and serious injury traffic
                 crashes attributable to each cause, to show the proportion of all such accidents that resulted
                 from each cause, and
                 (i)      if so, what is the latest year for which this information is available; and
                 (ii)     will the Minister provide a copy of that information; and
        (f)      according to the latest annual data available to the Office of Road Safety, what proportion of
                 fatal and serious injury traffic crashes were caused by speeding (not in which speeding was a
                 “factor”)?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
        (a)      Yes. The Western Australia Police provide two sources of crash data to the Office of Road
                 Safety (ORS) - preliminary data provided on the day of the crash (or shortly after) for media
                 purposes, followed by complete, verified data that has been entered into the Integrated Road
                 Information System at Main Roads Western Australia (MRWA). This latter set of data is
                 provided to the ORS by MRWA with the consent of the WA Police.
        (b)      The annual road crash publication "Reported Road Crashes in WA" provides numbers and
                 proportions of crashes and injuries for a vast majority of causes/factors identified in the
                 international literature as contributing to road crashes. The terms "factor" and "contributing
                 cause" can be and are commonly used synonymously in road safety. For a list of causes
                 recorded by Police, please refer to question on notice LA2683.
        (c)      The ORS utilises all available information about crash causes to plan and coordinate evidence-
                 based road safety initiatives, policies, strategies and responses.
        (d)      The annual road crash publication "Reported Road Crashes in WA" provides numbers and
                 proportions of crashes and injuries for a vast majority of component causes identified in the
                 international literature as contributing to road crashes. The 2004 and 2005 crash books have
                 been reviewed in light of international publications and improvements made relative to
                 previous WA publications. In the 2005 crash book no one table lists all causes in one place to
                 allow readers to prioritise all causes.            (The 2005 book is now available at
                 http://www.officeofroadsafety.wa.gov.au/documents/Annualcrashbook_2005.pdf).
        (e)      See (d) above.
        (f)      While impact speeds (or exact pre-crash vehicle speeds) are not currently collected by police
                 for all serious crashes, police do make an assessment of whether or not speeding was a causal
                 factor in a crash. Based on preliminary data for 2006, speeding was a "cause" in 35% of fatal
                 crashes and 18% of serious crashes attended by police on WA roads (one of the largest
                 component causes). Pre-crash vehicle speeds that result in impact forces above human
                 tolerance limits are most likely a "cause" in the vast majority of all road crashes involving
                 serious injury or death. Efforts to reduce both travel speeds across the network and speeding
                 behaviour are necessary to reduce the burden of injury from crashes where impact speeds are
                 higher than the human body can tolerate.
                           FATAL AND SERIOUS INJURY TRAFFIC CRASHES
2683.   Mr D.F. Barron-Sullivan to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services
I refer to Legislative Assembly question on notice No. 2407, and ask:
        (a)      does the Western Australian Police Service collate details of the causes of all fatal and serious
                 injury traffic crashes;
        (b)      will the Minister list all the possible causes of traffic crashes recorded by the Police;
        (c)      what does the Police Service do with this information about the cause of each fatal or serious
                 injury traffic crash;
6222                              [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

       (d)     why is this information not included in the statistics section of the Police Service's web site in
               a way so that readers can determine the proportion of fatal and serious traffic crashes
               attributable to each cause;
       (e)     does the Police Service collate or record the number of fatal and serious injury traffic crashes
               attributable to each cause, to show the proportion of all such accidents that resulted from each
               cause, and
               (i)        if so, what is the latest year for which this information is available; and
               (ii)       will the Minister provide a copy of that information; and
       (f)     according to the latest annual Police data, what proportion of fatal and serious injury traffic
               crashes were caused by speeding (not in which speeding was a “factor”)?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
       (a)     Yes. Where the cause of a fatal and serious injury traffic crash can be determined by the
               Attending Officer at their initial investigation into the traffic crash the cause is recorded. In the
               case of fatal crashes the cause may be updated at the completion of further inquiries into the
               traffic crash.
       (b)     There are 32 possible causes that are recorded in the Fatal and Serious (1-18) Details form
               which is the basis for the Traffic Enforcement and Crash Executive Information System
               (TEACEIS):
               1.         Alcohol
               2.         Alcohol/Drugs
               3.         Alcohol/Speed
               4.         Animals
               5.         Careless
               6.         Contravene TCL
               7.         Drugs
               8.         Fail to Give Way
               9.         Fallen Load
               10.        Fatigue
               11.        Give Way Contravened
               12.        Heart Attack
               13.        Inattention
               14.        Inexperience
               15.        Load Condition
               16.        Load Shift
               17.        Mechanical
               18.        NULL (No cause currently recorded as investigation is incomplete)
               19.        Object Through Window
               20.        Other Medical
               21.        Overtaking
               22.        Person Fell From Vehicle
               23.        Reckless
               24.        Road Condition
               25.        Speed
               26.        Stop Sign
               27.        Traffic Calming Device
               28.        Travel too Close
               29.        Turn in Front
               30.        Tyre Blow Out
               31.        Visibility
               32.        Weather Conditions
       (c)     Western Australia Police utilises this information in a number of ways:
               •      The causal data combined with other characteristics of the driver, passengers, vehicle,
                      road conditions, and weather conditions provide the data source which underpins the
                      traffic enforcement strategies and activities undertaken by the Western Australia Police.
               •      This data is used at local level to determine the optimal allocation of resources and
                      strategies and at corporate/divisional level to inform and enhance decision making about
                      enforcement activities and prioritisation of strategies.
                        [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                  6223

      •     The information informs the prosecution against the persons considered responsible for
            the traffic crash.
      •     This data is supplied to the Office of Road Safety to inform their decision making in
            relation to road safety campaigns.
      •     Main Roads WA uses this information to assist in their road safety data collection
            processes.
(d)   This information is currently not available on the WA Police website. The decision on whether
      this information should be released is made by the Coroner.
(e)   Yes. The Western Australia Police does record the cause for each fatal and serious injury crash
      (where the cause can be determined by the Attending Officer at their initial investigation into
      the traffic crash) and hence can collate crashes and the proportion of crashes by causes. The
      Western Australia Police does not publish data showing the proportion of traffic crashes
      attributed to each cause.
      (i)       2006 calendar year.
                Cause                                 No       Proportion
                Alcohol                               45       7.9%
                Alcohol/Drugs                         6        1.0%
                Alcohol/Speed                         56       9.8%
                Animals                               10       1.7%
                Careless                              100      17.5%
                Contravene TCL                        2        0.3%
                Drugs                                 4        0.7%
                Fail to give way                      55       9.6%
                Fatigue                               28       4.9%
                Heart attack                          2        0.3%
                Inattention                           75       13.1%
                Inexperience                          13       2.3%
                Load shift                            2        0.3%
                Mechanical                            2        0.3%
                NULL                                  4        0.7%
                Object through window                 1        0.2%
                Other medical                         19       3.3%
                Overtaking                            23       4.0%
                Person fell from Vehicle              4        0.7%
                Reckless                              21       3.7%
                Road Condition                        6        1.0%
                Speed                                 68       11.9%
                Stop sign                             3        0.5%
                Travel too close                      2        0.3%
                Turn in front                         4        0.7%
                Tyre blow out                         9        1.6%
                Visibility                            4        0.7%
                Weather Conditions                    4        0.7%
                Total                                 572      100.0%
(f)   According to the Western Australia Police 2006 fatal and serious crash data, as
      at 20 September 2007, the Attending Officers at their initial observations determined:
      •     11.9 per cent of fatal and serious injuries had the cause of speed
      •     9.8 per cent of fatal and serious injuries had the cause of alcohol/speed
      •     30.6 per cent of fatal and serious injuries had the contributing factor of speed
      It should be noted that the initial causal determination by the Attending Officer may be
      reviewed and amended following subsequent investigation of the crash. It should also be noted
      that the determination of causes is based on the judgement of Attending Officer based on the
      evidence and information as presented at the crash scene, and that causal factors are usually
      interlinked with, for example speed, carelessness, recklessness, inattention and alcohol/drugs
      contributing to the crash. The determination of the main causal factor is therefore a judgement
      based upon their interpretation of the crash scene.
6224                             [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

                                   HOMESWEST HOUSING - DENSITY
2685.   Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Housing and Works
(1)     Has the Government undertaken any research into the impacts (crime, unemployment, anti-social
        behaviour, amenity and call on Councils’ services) on local communities through Homeswest densities?
(2)     Does the Government support local communities with programmes and/or financial support to balance
        the burden?
(3)     Is the Government committed to reducing the Homeswest densities for those local governments above
        the state average, to balance social housing across the metropolitan area?
(4)     Given the current debate on the Government’s failure to supply state housing to those in need, will the
        Government ensure the balance of housing goes into areas below the State average?
(5)     What has the Government been doing to ensure that, in areas where social housing is in higher
        concentrations, appropriate support services, such as Medicare and Centrelink offices, are located
        properly?
(6)     Which suburbs have above average Homeswest densities?
(7)     What is the target/desirable housing density for Homeswest housing?
(8)     What is the average housing density for Homeswest housing?
Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:
The Department of Housing and Works has advised:
(1)     Yes.
(2)     The Government's Urban Renewal projects involve work to improve local infrastructure, and in most of
        these projects an agreement is made with the local authorities to improve infrastructure works on
        a 50/50 funding basis.
        Some assistance is also offered for community activities, such as sponsoring of sporting clubs in
        primary schools and school holiday programs.
(3)     The Urban Renewal program has been reducing public housing presence in estates with excessive
        concentrations of public housing dwellings since its inception. Its aims are to refurbish homes for sale
        to the public and to existing tenants, upgrade and refurbish rental housing stock to make public housing
        a legitimate part of a sustainable, revitalised community.
        In the metropolitan area, there are current redevelopment projects in Balga, Koondoola, Girrawheen,
        Westminster, Coolbellup, Midland, Midvale, Swan View, Koongamia, Hamilton Hill, and Queens Park.
        Additionally, the Department is targeting a number of country areas including Withers, Carey Park;
        Collie, Spencer Park, Adeline, Nulsen, Rangeway, South Carnarvon and South Hedland.
        The objectives of the Urban Renewal Program include to:
        •   generally reduce the public housing presence in the estate to approximately 12% over time;
        •   legitimise public housing as part of a balanced social mix;
        •   encourage home ownership and attract new people to the community;
        •   encourage a sense of added security for tenants, existing and new home owners; and
        •   upgrade public housing stock.
(4)     When acquiring additional social housing stock the Department considers the existing presence and has
        previously sought to adhere to a ratio of one-in-nine properties. This applies to all land development,
        new subdivisions, redevelopment of land or subdivisions within existing suburbs, and purchases of
        existing dwellings.
        The Department also considers a range of other factors, including proximity to public transport and
        essential services such as shops, schools, medical facilities, public open space, sports facilities,
        community facilities, employment opportunities and other support services, as well as ensuring that new
        acquisitions achieve good value for money. However, the procurement of housing stock must comply
        with local government planning schemes, which may limit the Department's options in this regard.
(5)     While the location of Medicare and Centrelink offices is a Commonwealth decision and responsibility,
        the Department considers the proximity of support services and public transport when acquiring new
        social housing stock. However, there are a number of other factors that the Department considers in the
        acquisition of new properties.
                                  [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                   6225

(6)     Figures showing market presence by suburb for 2007 have not yet been made available by the
        Australian Bureau of Statistics. According to the June 2006 figures, metropolitan suburbs with a public
        housing market presence exceeding the average of 4.14% were as follows:
        Karawara                  Koondoola                  Bedford                    Armadale
        Willagee                  Westminster                Caversham                  West Perth
        Ashfield                  Coodanup                   Mount Claremont            Leda
        Midvale                   Beaconsfield               Wilson                     South Fremantle
        Koongamia                 North Beach                Medina                     Cooloongup
        Brentwood                 North Fremantle            Palmyra                    Embleton
        Bentley                   Midland                    Parmelia                   Osborne Park
        Highgate                  Doubleview                 Brookdale                  Shenton Park
        Northbridge               White Gum Valley           Orelia                     Naval Base
        Balga                     Neerabup                   Balcatta                   Perth
        Hilton                    Carlisle                   Kensington                 Joondalup
        Manning                   Innaloo                    Beeliar                    Warnbro
        Fremantle                 Nollamara                  East Victoria Park         Helena Valley
        Mirrabooka                Banksia Grove              Yangebup                   Maddington
        Glendalough               Langford                   Woodbridge                 Eden Hill
        Saint James               Cloverdale                 Bassendean                 Swan View
        Rivervale                 East Perth                 Mosman Park                Leederville
        Girrawheen                Subiaco                    Gosnells                   Middle Swan
        Coolbellup                O'Connor                   Cannington                 Ballajura
        Lockridge                 Mandurah                   Maylands                   Viveash
        Belmont                   Queens Park                Henley Brook               Inglewood
        Hamilton Hill             South Lake                 Bayswater                  Tuart Hill
        Redcliffe                 Stratton                   Kenwick                    Greenfields
        Calista                   Pinjarra                   Beechboro                  Marangaroo
(7)     The Department recognises the social sustainability benefits that housing diversity provides to both its
        service recipients and the wider community and is therefore committed to providing a spread of social
        housing. The Department also endeavours to provide a diverse mix of public rental housing including
        singles', family and seniors' accommodation, across all areas to encourage social diversity. The
        Department gives preference to acquiring or developing new housing in areas with a public housing
        presence in the order of one-in-nine or 11.1%.
(7)     The average public housing market presence by suburb in the metropolitan area in June 2006
        was 4.14%.
         BOAT OWNERS - ANNUAL MOORING COSTS ON SWAN AND CANNING RIVERS
2686.   Dr S.C. Thomas to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
(1)     Can the Minister provide a breakdown of the annual mooring cost fees for boat owners within the Swan
        and Canning Rivers from 2000 to 2007?
(2)     When are the 2007 mooring fees due?
(3)     Why has there been a significant increase of annual mooring fees for the upcoming twelve months?
(4)     Will the Department of Planning and Infrastructure provide any further facilities for boat owners,
        especially those who moor their boats within the Swan and Canning Rivers?
(5)     Will the Minister consider introducing a rebate for pensioner and senior card holders similar to rebates
        issued on vehicle drivers’ licenses?
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied:
(1)     The following table shows the yearly annual mooring fee from 1998:
        Year             Fee $
        1998-1999        195.00
        1999-2000        195.00
        2000-2001        214.50
        2001-2002        220.00
        2002-2003        225.50
        2003-2004        232.10
        2004-2005        237.70
        2005-2006        242.90
6226                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

         2006-2007         251.60
         2007-2008         364.30
(2)      Annual mooring fees become due every twelve months from the original mooring attainment date. For
         example, if the mooring was approved and installed on 10 October 2005, the annual fee becomes due
         yearly on 10 October.
(3)      Since their introduction in 1998, mooring fees have not increased over and above the annual consumer
         price index (CPI). The costs associated with maintaining moorings in the Swan and Canning Rivers
         have not been fully covered by the fees charged, with the Department for Planning and Infrastructure
         (DPI) absorbing the shortfall.
         The Department of Treasury and Finance seeks that agencies strive towards full cost recovery. The
         Auditor General in his review of Government Fees and Charges supports this.
         The increase in 2007/08 seeks to address the growing costs associated with the management of
         moorings.
(4)      The DPI has no plans to expand mooring facilities within the Swan and Canning Rivers.
(5)      No.
                 BUNBURY CITY COUNCIL - LEASE OF LAND TO BUNBURY CAR CLUB
2687.    Dr S.C. Thomas to the Minister representing the Minister for Local Government
I refer to the Bunbury City Council and the headlease of land containing the Bunbury City Speedway to the
Bunbury Car Club, and ask:
         (a)      did the lease signed by Bunbury City Council and Bunbury Car Club in 2003 allow subleasing
                  of the land to Speedworx Pty Ltd, and
                  (i)      if so, what conditions were placed on, or written into, the sublease;
         (b)      were the conditions in the sublease fulfilled, and
                  (i)      if not, which conditions were not fulfilled and which party failed to fulfil those
                           conditions;
         (c)      did the City of Bunbury take any action with regards to any failure to fulfil obligations under
                  that lease, and
                  (i)      if so, what actions were taken;
         (d)      what liability is accepted, or alleged as applying to Bunbury City Council, in relation to any
                  failure to fulfil obligations under the lease or sublease; and
         (e)      does liability insurance held by the City of Bunbury extend to the Bunbury Car Club in
                  relation to these actions, and
                  (i)      if not, why not?
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied:
The City of Bunbury has advised the following:
(a) and (i)       The Council agreed at its meeting on 23 September 2003 to allow Speedworx Pty Ltd to enter
                  into a formal sub-lease with the Bunbury Car Club. Full details of the decision and conditions
                  placed on the sublease are recorded in the Minutes of the meeting which are publicly available
                  on the City of Bunbury website at www.bunbury.wa.gov.au
(b) and (i)       The Council's Solicitor prepared the draft sub-lease document and the document was issued to
                  the two parties. The two parties are in dispute in respect to sub-lease issues.
(c) and (i)       Yes, the Council has liaised extensively with the two parties and at Council's cost, initiated
                  mediation through Solicitors McLeod's, however, the matters are still not resolved.
(d)      None
(e) and (i)       No, because the Bunbury Car Club is required to have its own insurance under the head lease.
              DEPARTMENT OF SPORT AND RECREATION - GRANT TO BUNBURY CAR CLUB
2688.    Dr S.C. Thomas to the Minister for Sport and Recreation
I refer to the $25,000 grant by the Department of Sport and Recreation to Bunbury Car Club in 2003, which was
apparently never received by Bunbury Car Club or deposited into their account, and ask:
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6227

         (a)      who received those monies;
         (b)      into which account were those monies paid;
         (c)      who was the owner of the account to which the cheque was deposited;
         (d)      if that information is not available in the Department of Sport and Recreation, will the Minister
                  find it out through application to the banking service of the Department of Sport and
                  Recreation, and
                  (i)      if not, why not; and
         (e)      given these monies appear to have been misplaced or misappropriated, will the Minister
                  investigate this issue and determine the ultimate recipient of the monies, and
                  (i)      if not, why not?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
         (a)      No Department of Sport and Recreation funds were paid.
         (b)-(c) Not applicable
         (d)      Department of Sport and Recreation staff have investigated this grant within the internal grant
                  database and financial system.
                  (i)      Not applicable
         (e)      No investigation required from Department of Sport and Recreation's perspective as no grant
                  paid.
                  (i)      Not applicable
                                         ORGAN DONOR REGISTER
2690.    Dr K.D. Hames to the Minister for Health
I refer to Western Australian residents who have registered for organ donation, and ask:
         (a)      how many people have registered for each month in 2007, to the end of August;
         (b)      what proportion of eligible people in Western Australia have registered for organ donation;
         (c)      how does Western Australia compare with other Australian States and Territories;
         (d)      what positive action has the Western Australian Government taken to increase the number of
                  people on the register; and
         (e)      what evaluation has been carried out to assess the effectiveness of community education
                  programs for organ donation?
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
         (a)      Total organ and tissue registrations for each month are as follows:
                  January           869
                  February          1,185
                  March             1,508
                  April             1,127
                  May               1,558
                  June              960
                  July1             Not available
                  August1           Not available
                  1
                   Medicare Australia is going through a process of integrating its administered programs into
                  the one central system. As a result of this process, monthly data is unavailable for July and
                  August 2007.
         (b)      41% of the eligible population (those over 16 years old) in WA are registered.
         (c)      Percentage of eligible population registered:
                  South Australia                     52%
                  Tasmania                            48%
                  New South Wales                     43%
                  Western Australia                   41%
                  Queensland                          28%
6228                                 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

                    Victoria                           18%
                    Australian Capital Territory       17%
                    Northern Territory                 10%
         (d)        DonateWest has been funded to employ a Communications Officer who is responsible for
                    coordinating community education and awareness around the State. Up to 18 September 2007
                    DonateWest has presented to 108 schools, community groups, expos, health seminars and
                    health education talks. This is double on previous calendar years.
                    Each year DonateWest participates fully in the National Organ Donor Awareness Week. This
                    results in, on average, 50 media interviews, articles and reports across the state during the
                    week.
         (e)        One of DonateWest's most prominent community education programs is the Organ Donor
                    Awareness Week. During the month following Organ Donor Awareness Week there is
                    between a 150% and 200% increase in the number registering.
                    In 2000, prior to the formation of DonateWest there were approximately 500,000 West
                    Australians registered to donate. The current figure of 650,000 represents a 30% increase in
                    registration numbers.
                    In the early years of the Australian Organ Donor Register (AODR) and before DonateWest
                    developed its community education strategy, approximately 100 West Australians each month
                    registered on the AODR. This has now increased to an average of 1,000 new registrations per
                    month.
         Note: Data source for this reply is Medicare 2007, Australian Organ Donor Register.
          DENTAL HOSPITALS AND GOVERNMENT DENTAL CLINICS - STAFF VACANCIES
2692.    Dr K.D. Hames to the Minister for Health
Can the Minister advise the number of vacant positions at each of the dental hospitals and other Government
dental clinics for each month of 2006 and 2007 to end of July for:
         (a)        dentists;
         (b)        dental nurses;
         (c)        dental assistants; and
         (d)        dental prosthetists?
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
[See paper 3286.]
                  HOSPITALS - DIAGNOSTIC SURGICAL EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES
2693.    Dr K.D. Hames to the Minister for Health
I refer to diagnostic surgical equipment and procedures, and ask:
(a)      what equipment (i.e. MRIs, dialysis machines, ECG, stress monitors etc) is located in the following
         hospitals:
         (i)        Royal Perth Hospital;
         (ii)       Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital;
         (iii)      Fremantle Hospital;
         (iv)       Princess Margaret Hospital:
         (v)        King Edward Memorial Hospital;
         (vi)       Joondalup Hospital;
         (vii)      Armadale Hospital;
         (viii)     Swan Kalamunda Hospital;
         (ix)       Rockingham Hospital; and
         (x)        Peel Health Campus; and
(b)      how many procedures for each machine were performed for each month for the following years:
         (i)        2005;
         (ii)       2006; and
         (iii)      2007 to end of July?
                                   [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                      6229

Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
(a)-(b) There are hundreds of medical machines operating in the public health system and reporting to the
        detailed level requested by the Member would be very time intensive and divert staff from their core
        duties. I therefore provide the attached summary and will endeavour to answer future queries from the
        Member should he wish to seek further information on a specific machine. [See paper 3287.]
      DOCTORS - NUMBER OF NEW GRADUATES RECRUITED INTO PUBLIC HOSPITAL SYSTEM
                                AND RETENTION RATE
2694.    Dr K.D. Hames to the Minister for Health
(1)      How many persons graduated as doctors from universities in Western Australia during 2003, 2004,
         2005, 2006, and to date in 2007?
(2)      How many of these graduates were recruited into the Western Australian public hospital system in each
         of the above years?
(3)      How many of these doctors were still in the public health system:
         (a)      after 2 years; and
         (b)      after 4 years?
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
(1)      The number of persons graduating from the medical school at the University of Western Australia was:
         2003     123
         2004     107
         2005     111
         2006     125
         2007     135
         Note:The first graduates from the Medical School at University of Notre Dame will graduate at the end
         of 2008.
(2)-(3) The number of graduates recruited into the Western Australian public hospital system was:
Recruited into the public hospital system                     Still employed after        Still employed
                                                              after 2 years               after 4 years
         WA graduates      Other graduates Total              Total                       Total
2003     not available     not available       123              79                          62
2004     not available     not available       141              84                        not yet available
2005     not available     not available       130              72                        not yet available
2006       111               27                138            not yet available           not yet available
2007       124               30                154            not yet available           not yet available
       NURSES - NUMBER OF NEW GRADUATES RECRUITED INTO PUBLIC HOSPITAL SYSTEM
                                AND RETENTION RATE
2695.    Dr K.D. Hames to the Minister for Health
(1)      How many persons graduated as nurses from universities in Western Australia during 2003, 2004, 2005,
         2006, and to date in 2007?
(2)      How many of these graduates were recruited into the Western Australian public hospital system in each
         of the above years?
(3)      How many of these nurses were still in the public health system:
         (a)      after 2 years; and
         (b)      after 4 years?
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
(1)      The number of persons graduating as nurses from universities in Western Australia was:
         Curtin University Edith Cowan University      Murdoch University1        Notre Dame University2      Total
2003              189                  357             Not applicable                     36                  574
2004              222                  377             Not applicable                     63                  655
2005              235                  313             Not applicable                     63                  608
2006              230                  320                   23                           67                  637
20073             100                  Not available         Nil                          15                  148
6230                                [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

Note:
1
         Murdoch University: Registered Nurse course commenced 2004.
2
         Notre Dame University: Fremantle and Broome Campuses.
3
         Please note that 2007 only indicates mid year graduates. Totals do not include expected end of year
         graduates.
(2)-(3) The number of graduates recruited into the Western Australian public hospital system was:
                  Recruited into the public           Still employed              Still employed
                  hospital system                     2 years after               4 years after
         2003              464                           332                         274
         2004              430                           305                      Not yet available
         2005              503                           337                      Not yet available
         2006              432                        Not yet available           Not yet available
         2007              468                        Not yet available           Not yet available
Note:
1
         Data on recruitment and retention to the public hospital system is as at September 2007.
2
         Data on those still employed 2 years after is only available for graduates employed in the years
         2003, 2004 and 2005. Data on those still employed 4 years after is only available for graduates
         employed in 2003.
                  TRANSPORT OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS - POLICE HOURS INVOLVED
2696.    Mr R.F. Johnson to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services
(1)      How many Police Officer hours has it taken to transport Juvenile Offenders throughout Western
         Australia per month over the last 12 months?
(2)      How many Officers are required when transporting Juvenile Offenders throughout the State?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
(1)      The number of hours it has taken to transport Juvenile Offenders throughout Western
         Australia 12 months to date:
         Sep-06            574
         Oct-06            392.5
         Nov-06            621.5
         Dec-06            422
         Jan-07            848
         Feb-07            855.6
         Mar-07            934
         Apr-07            680.5
         May-07            999
         Jun-07            869.5
         Jul-07            529.5
         Aug-07            796
         Total             8522.1
(2)      When escorts are conducted by road, a minimum of two officers is required for each escort. When
         escorts are conducted by air, one officer is required to travel with each juvenile prisoner.
      CLEARING OF NATIVE VEGETATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FIONA STANLEY HOSPITAL
2697.    Mr T.R. Sprigg to the Minister for Health
(1)      Can the Minister confirm that all ten Principles of Clearing Native Vegetation listed in the
         Environmental Protection Act 1986 will be adhered to when the clearing of native vegetation for the
         Fiona Stanley Hospital in Murdoch commences?
(2)      Which specific proposals are at variance with the Act’s clearing principles?
(3)      Will the Minister confirm what measures have been taken to ensure the survival of the Caladenia
         huegelii, which are not on the Murdoch Activity site but are situated directly opposite and are at risk if
         surrounding vegetation is removed?
(4)      How will the Minister ensure that the clearing of vegetation from the Fiona Stanley Hospital site will
         not have a detrimental effect on neighbouring conservation areas?
                                    [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                   6231

(5)     How will the Minister overcome the fact that the proposed land clearing is in violation of Section 4.7 of
        the Draft Murdoch Activity Centre Structure Report which is in favour of reducing greenhouse gas
        emissions when decomposition of vegetation results in direct emissions of greenhouse gases and the
        loss of vegetation prevents the continued sequestration of greenhouse gases?
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
(1)-(2) DEC has issued a Clearing Permit for the Fiona Stanley Hospital project, which recognises the critical
        importance of this facility to the Western Australian community and sets a number of requirements and
        conditions with which the Department of Health will comply.
        Queries relating to processes used by the Department of Environment and Conservation in its
        consideration of environmental matters should be directed to the Minister for the Environment.
(3)     The population of Caladenia huegelii referred to is assumed to be the population protected in a
        cordoned off area of the South Street Interchange, which is separated from the Murdoch Activity site by
        the Kwinana Freeway. This area is under the management of Main Roads WA and is not part of the
        Fiona Stanley Hospital site.
        Based on the specialist advice DOH have been given, DOH believes there is little potential for this
        population to be affected by the development of the Fiona Stanley Hospital, however DOH will work
        closely with Main Roads WA and continue to monitor the situation to ensure the population is not
        impacted.
(4)     Any adjacent areas of native vegetation will be protected from disturbance through implementation of a
        Construction Management Plan. The plan will address site disturbance, the prevention of the spread of
        dieback and weeds, and control of access.
(5)     Preparation of an Offset Strategy is part of the conditions of the Clearing Permit issued by the DEC.
                                   LICENSING OF CIGARETTE RETAILERS
2699.   Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Health
(1)     How many retailers of cigarettes have applied to be licensed to sell cigarettes in Western Australia since
        the new regulations under the Tobacco Products Control Act 2006 came into force on 31 May 2007?
(2)     What checks have been done to ensure that all retailers are now licensed?
(3)     Are there any licences still to be issued by the Department of Health; and
        (a)       if so, how many?
(4)     What will the funds raised from the $200 fee per licence be used for?
(5)     What is the penalty for a cigarette retailer not having a licence?
(6)     Have any retailers been cautioned for not properly adhering to the new restrictions on tobacco displays;
        and
        (a)       if so, how many retailers and what penalties were issued?
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
(1)     3,748.
(2)     Advertisements were placed in newspapers statewide from 12 May 2007 to advise retailers and the
        community about the implementation of the new licensing system. The advertisements included details
        regarding the mail-out of approximately 5,000 information kits to retailers by 25 May 2007, their
        requirement to apply for a licence, and information about interim measures to allow for business as
        usual during the period of transition.
        Since 23 July 2007, tobacco retailers have been unable to buy tobacco products from a wholesaler in
        Western Australia if they have not applied for a licence.
(3)     Yes.
        (a)       2,736.
(4)     The funds will be used for:
        •     processing applications for, and issuing of, licences;
        •     licensing education; and
        •     enforcement of the licensing scheme.
(5)     A $50,000 maximum penalty.
6232                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

(6)     No.
        (a)      Not applicable.
                RAC CONTRACT TO PERFORM MANDATORY VEHICLE INSPECTIONS
2700.   Mr A.J. Simpson to the Minister representing the Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning and
        Infrastructure
In reference to the answer to Question on Notice No. 2413, given on 14 August 2007, can the Minister advise
why the Department of Planning and Infrastructure was granted an exemption by the State Supply Commission
for the contract granted to the Royal Automobile Club to perform mandatory vehicle inspections?
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied:
The exemption was granted to allow time to properly undertake the necessary research, consultation,
development and transition activities for a public Expression of Interest, while in the short term, allowing the
considerable demand pressures resulting from Western Australia's booming economy to be met.
  BUILDING DISPUTES TRIBUNAL - COMPLAINTS RECEIVED AND REMEDIAL ORDERS ISSUED
2702.   Mr T.R. Buswell to the Minister for Consumer Protection
(1)     I refer to the Building Disputes Tribunal and ask how many complaints were received by the Tribunal
        for each of the following periods:
        (a)      July 2004 to June 2005;
        (b)      July 2005 to June 2006; and
        (c)      July 2006 to June 2007?
(2)     In each of the above years, how many of these complaints resulted in remedial orders being issued by
        the Tribunal?
(3)     In each of the above years, how many of the remedial orders issued have not been satisfactorily dealt
        with?
(4)     What actions are available to the Building Disputes Tribunal when a remedial order is not complied
        with?
Ms S.M. McHALE replied:
Building Disputes Tribunal
(1)     (a)      785
        (b)      888
        (c)      811
(2)     The following information provides the number of Orders to Remedy issued by the Tribunal in the
        requested years. However, the figures do not necessarily relate to complaints received in that year as the
        time between lodgment of a complaint and the issue of a particular Order to Remedy can span a number
        of years depending on the nature of the dispute.
        (a)      456
        (b)      498
        (c)      432
(3)     This information cannot be obtained electronically. A manual examination would consume significant
        resources and should the member have a specific concern in relation to a case, the Tribunal would be
        happy to provide this information.
(4)     It is incumbent upon the complainant to inform the Tribunal of any failure to comply with an Order to
        Remedy. Where the Tribunal is notified of a failure to comply with an Order to Remedy the Tribunal
        may issue in its place an Order to Pay, which constitutes a debt due to the person to whom it is ordered
        to be paid and is recoverable in the Magistrates Court. The Tribunal may also refer that failure to
        comply with the Tribunal's Order to the Builders' Registration Board for investigation under the
        Builders' Registration Act 1939.
         PHASE-OUT OF USE OF HIGHLY WATER-SOLUBLE PHOSPHOROUS FERTILISERS
2704.   Dr S.C. Thomas to the Minister for the Environment
(1)     Has the Minister received the results from the stakeholder symposiums held on the phase-out of highly
        soluble phosphate fertilisers from environmentally sensitive areas; and
        (a)      if not, when does the Minister expect to receive them; and
        (b)      if so, will a copy of the results be released to the Member for Capel?
                                     [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                   6233

Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied:
(1)      No.
         (a)      The Department of Environment and Conservation is in the process of reviewing stakeholder
                  input on the Fertiliser Action Plan and will report back to me with these results in
                  October 2007. I will then consider the actions required to phase out highly water soluble
                  phosphorus fertilisers by 2011.
         (b)      Not applicable.
                           GOVERNMENT SUBSIDY ON INCONTINENCE AIDS
2705.    Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Health
(1)      As the purchase of incontinence pads can run into thousands of dollars per annum, are there any plans
         to increase the current $470 per annum subsidy?
(2)      Are there any other alternative methods to obtain assistance to purchase incontinence pads in addition to
         the $470 per annum subsidy when individuals who need them are suffering financial difficulties; and
         (a)      if so, could the Minister provide details?
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied:
This question should be redirected to the Minister for Disability Services.
                MONITORING OF TRAFFIC VOLUMES BETWEEN PERTH AND MANDURAH
2706.    Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
(1)      Will vehicle traffic volumes on the main route between Perth and Mandurah be monitored to establish if
         there has been a reduction in the usage of vehicles following the opening of the railway; and
         (a)      if so, how?
(2)      Will those volumes be monitored before and after the opening of the railway; and
         (a)      if so, for what period; and
         (b)      if not, why not?
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied:
(1)      Yes.
         (a)      A number of traffic collection methodologies will be utilised including pneumatic rubber tubes
                  stretched across the road surface, inductive loop traffic detectors on Kwinana Freeway and at
                  various signalised intersections providing continuous data input.
(2)      Yes.
         (a)      The Perth Metropolitan 2006/07 short term program counted in excess of 1000 locations south
                  of the river between July 2006 and June 2007. These locations provide sufficient 'before'
                  data. In addition historic intersection data is available for trend analysis as required, and the
                  Intelligent Transport System data will provide traffic volumes for the months immediately
                  prior to the rail opening.
                  'After' counts will be conducted at selected strategic locations in the weeks immediately
                  following the opening, and longer term monitoring (1-2+ years) is also planned. The 2008/09
                  program will revisit the majority of the sites counted in 2006/07 giving an indication of
                  changes in traffic volumes.
                  In addition, Travel Time surveys on Kwinana Freeway will be conducted before and after the
                  opening.
         (b)      Not applicable.
                                            TEACHERS - NUMBER
2707.    Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Education and Training
(1)      The Government has publicly stated that since 2001 it has employed more than 1,400 extra teachers,
         and I ask the Minister how many FTE teachers have left the profession for each of the following years:
         (a)      2001;
         (b)      2002;
         (c)      2003;
6234                               [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

        (d)      2004;
        (e)      2005; and
        (f)      2006?
(2)     How much did Western Australia’s population increase by for each of the following years:
        (a)      2001;
        (b)      2002;
        (c)      2003;
        (d)      2004;
        (e)      2005; and
        (f)      2006?
Mr M. McGOWAN replied:
1.      The number of permanent teachers who have left the Department of Education and subsequently the
        Department of Education and Training for each of the following years, expressed as FTE is as follows:
        2001     341
        2002     360
        2003     335
        2004     315
        2005     440
        2006     595
        The increase of 1,426 FTE teachers employed by the Department between 2001/02 and 2006/07 is over
        and above the replacement of teachers who left the Department during this period.
2.      This information should be sought from the relevant agency responsible for demographic data..
                                        POLICE OFFICERS - NUMBER
2709.   Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services
(1)     The Government has publicly stated that since 2001 it has employed more than 370 additional police,
        and I ask the Minister how many FTE police have left the profession for each of the following years:
        (a)      2001;
        (b)      2002;
        (c)      2003;
        (d)      2004;
        (e)      2005; and
        (f)      2006?
(2)     How much did Western Australia’s population increase by for each of the following years:
        (a)      2001;
        (b)      2002;
        (c)      2003;
        (d)      2004;
        (e)      2005; and
        (f)      2006?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
(1)     (a)      163
        (b)      163
        (c)      191
        (d)      202
        (e)      285
        (f)      362
        The 370 additional police referred to are additional to attrition.
(2)     The Estimated Resident Population (ERP) for WA has been sourced from the Australian Bureau of
        Statistics (ABS), which are based on the 2001 & 2006 Census of Population and Housing results.
        (a)      Between the years 2000 and 2001 the ERP increased by 26700 residents.
        (b)      Between the years 2001 and 2002 the ERP increased by 24482 residents
        (c)      Between the years 2002 and 2003 the ERP increased by 26731 residents.
        (d)      Between the years 2003 and 2004 the ERP increased by 29634 residents.
        (e)      Between the years 2004 and 2005 the ERP increased by 34389 residents.
        (f)      Between the years 2005 and 2006 the ERP increased by 42650 residents.
                                  [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                     6235

PREMISES HOUSING DANGEROUS GOODS - LEAKAGE FROM UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS
2710.   Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for the Environment
In 2004 a report was published in the Australian Journal of Soil Research stating that an audit of 6,500 premises
in Western Australia with dangerous goods revealed 57 per cent had underground storage tanks. Half were in
Perth and 217 were leaking pollutants. These statistics were printed in the Government’s State of the
Environment Report 2007. With reference to these reports, I ask the Minister:
        (a)       what action has the Government undertaken since the Australian Journal of Soil Research
                  report was published in 2004 to remedy the problem regarding leaking underground storage
                  tanks;
        (b)       what standards or guidelines does the Government apply to underground storage tanks in order
                  to reduce the possibility of leaks and groundwater contamination;
        (c)       to date how many of these leaking underground storage tanks have been dealt with:
                  (i)     in metropolitan Perth; and
                  (ii)    outside metropolitan Perth;
        (d)       when will the remaining leaking underground storage tanks be dealt with:
                  (i)     in metropolitan Perth; and
                  (ii)    outside metropolitan Perth; and
        (e)       how often does the Government inspect underground storage tanks:
                  (i)     in metropolitan Perth; and
                  (ii)    outside metropolitan Perth?
Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied:
        (a)-(e)   The Department of Environment and Conservation is not responsible for the management of
                  underground storage tanks. This is the responsibility of the Department of Consumer and
                  Employment Protection. .
        AIR QUALITY BRANCH OF DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION
2712.   Dr J.M. Woollard to the Minister for the Environment
(1)     What is the minimum level of staffing required in the Air Quality Branch of the Department of
        Environment and Conservation?
(2)     How many staff have resigned from the Air Quality Branch of the Department of Environment and
        Conservation in the last two years?
(3)     What is the current level of staffing in the Air Quality Branch of the Department of Environment and
        Conservation?
(4)     The Air Quality Branch was formerly in the Department of Environment (as a regulator) and the Forest
        Operations Branch was in CALM (as an operator), and I ask the Minister why is the Air Quality Branch
        and the Forest Operations Group now placed within the same department?
(5)     Is the Minister concerned about a serious conflict of interest existing between the Air Quality Branch
        (as a regulator) and the Forest Operations Branch (as an operator) now that they are both in the same
        department?
Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied:
(1)     The Air Quality Management Branch has 34 permanent full time positions and 15 contract/temporary
        staff. This is adequate to meet current departmental business objectives for the Branch. Contract and
        temporary staff are employed on a project basis, to provide flexibility and efficient use of government
        resources.
(2)     Seven permanent employees have resigned within the past two years.
(3)     The Air Quality Management Branch currently has 29 permanent full time employees. Recruitment to
        fill the five vacant permanent positions will commence shortly following resolution of accommodation
        issues.
(4)     The former Department of Conservation and Land Management did not have a branch called Forest
        Operations Branch, but did have a Forest Management Branch. Notwithstanding the above, it is
        assumed from the nature of the question that it refers to the Fire Management Services Branch.
6236                             [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]

        The Fire Management Services Branch and the Air Quality Management Branch were incorporated
        within the Department of Environment and Conservation as a consequence of the amalgamation of the
        former Department of Environment and CALM on 1 July 2006.
(5)     No, there is no conflict of interest with incorporating both branches within a single department. The
        current organisational arrangement provides the opportunity for improved coordination and delivery of
        air quality management and forest management.
                                         POLICE PROSECUTORS
2733.   Mr P.D. Omodei to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services
(1)     How many police prosecutors work in the Prosecuting Division in the Perth metropolitan area?
(2)     How many police prosecutors work in the Prosecuting Division in regional Western Australia?
(3)     How many charges were dealt with by the Prosecuting Division in the following years:
        (a)     2001–2002;
        (b)     2002–2003;
        (c)     2003–2004;
        (d)     2004–2005; and
        (e)     2005–2006?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
(1)     58
(2)     19
(3)     (a)     66453
        (b)     67568
        (c)     71344
        (d)     76344
        (e)     84924
                                         POLICE PROSECUTORS
2734.   Mr P.D. Omodei to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services
(1)     How many court matters were dealt with by the Prosecuting Division in the following years:
        (a)     2001–2002;
        (b)     2002–2003;
        (c)     2003–2004;
        (d)     2004–2005; and
        (e)     2005–2006?
(2)     On how many occasions did police prosecutors from the Prosecuting Division appear in the Magistrates
        Court in the following years:
        (a)     2001–2002;
        (b)     2002–2003;
        (c)     2003–2004;
        (d)     2004–2005; and
        (e)     2005–2006?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
(1)     (a)     66453
        (b)     67568
        (c)     71344
        (d)     76344
        (e)     84924
(2)     (a)     146429
        (b)     143463
        (c)     152703
        (d)     162857
        (e)     178301
                                 [ASSEMBLY - Tuesday, 16 October 2007]                                  6237

                                         POLICE PROSECUTORS
2735.   Mr P.D. Omodei to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services
(1)     How many trials were conducted by police prosecutors from the Prosecuting Division in the following
        years:
        (a)     2001–2002;
        (b)     2002–2003;
        (c)     2003–2004;
        (d)     2004–2005; and
        (e)     2005–2006?
(2)     Are police prosecutors rostered to attend several hearings simultaneously, with the view that one may
        be cancelled?
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied:
(1)     (a)     9654
        (b)     9491
        (c)     8215
        (d)     8820
        (e)     9987
(2)     No
                                                __________

				
DOCUMENT INFO