Operation Least Said WA connection to Operation Florida NSW

Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 3 March 2004]

p283c-284a

Mr Colin Barnett; Dr Geoff Gallop; Mr Rob Johnson; Speaker

[1] POLICE ROYAL COMMISSION REPORT, REFERENCE TO SIGNIFICANT AND SUSTAINED CORRUPTION AND CRIMINAL CONDUCT

16. Mr C.J. BARNETT to the Premier:

I refer the Premier to his ministerial statement in this House yesterday regarding the 1053-page report of the Royal Commission Into "Whether There Has Been Any Corrupt or Criminal Conduct by Western Australian Police Officers", in which he stated that the report found the following -

. . . there has been significant and sustained corruption and criminal conduct in the Western Australia Police Service since 1985;

• (1) Can the Premier point to the page of the royal commission report that says there is significant and sustained corruption in the WA Police Service?
•  
• (2) Given that only two out of 5 000 WA police officers have been charged as a result of the police royal commission, will the Premier now admit he is smearing the entire Police Service in an attempt to justify his expenditure of $28 million of taxpayers’ funds?

Dr G.I. GALLOP replied:

(1)-(2)
The Liberal Party learns nothing. Western Australian history rolls by, and members opposite learn absolutely nothing about what is needed to improve our society. In fact, the definition of Western Australian liberalism is complacency. The Liberals sweep these things under the carpet, as they did for eight years. I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question: are there quotation marks around those two words? That is point one. Point two: anybody who reads those two volumes would reach no other conclusion.

The first page of the report says that the evidence shows that the full range of corrupt or criminal
conduct in the Western Australia Police Service is in line with similar findings by other commissions in Australia.

Mr M.J. Birney: What does that mean?

Dr G.I. GALLOP: What do you think it means, my friend? The report then goes on to show that that occurred over a long period. A substantial proportion of the cases occurred a number of years ago, but there was a continuing problem in the service. Indeed, the royal commission expressed concern that a number of the officers who participated in this conduct and who not only refused to admit it, but also uniformly denied it with vehemence, remain in the WA Police Service.

Regarding the evidence in the Operation Least Said segment dealing with the period from 1985 to 2003, the royal commission said that it demonstrated a continuing pattern of police misconduct throughout that period that had proceeded largely unimpeded and unpunished by the investigative practices in place during that time.

Point of Order

Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The Premier is obviously reading from an official document. I ask that he table that document.

The SPEAKER: It does not appear to be an official document.

Mr R.F. Johnson: He’s quoting from it.

The SPEAKER: Members can quote from their notes during question time.

Questions without Notice Resumed

Dr G.I. GALLOP: If assaults, perjury, drug dealing, and improper disclosure of confidential information is not significant, what is? Does the Leader of the Opposition regard that to be significant malpractice? Is it criminal behaviour? Of course it is. I also point out to the Leader of the Opposition that this behaviour continues. In fact, it continues to happen right up to today; so much so that the police royal commission stated that “. . . internal investigations . . . were clearly unsatisfactory.” What is of more significance is the extent to which the WA Police Service has been ineffective in monitoring these events and modifying its procedures to deal with that conduct and to prevent its repetition. The only person in Western Australia incapable of reading the royal commission report is the Leader of the Opposition. He is in a party that covered up these matters for eight years when in government.

In conclusion, the Leader of the Opposition also said in his response to my speech that I used the word “systemic”. I have never used that word in that regard. There was a good discussion of this issue at the press conference yesterday, at which we specifically said that the situation in Western  serious, continuing and sustained, but not systemic. I call on the Leader of the Opposition to take away those comments from the public debate because they are not true. It is indicative of a continuing pattern in which the Leader of the Opposition says anything about anything to try to make a political point. Inevitably, what he says is not true. His credibility is on the line in relation to this issue.

Operation Florida The West Australian Connection

 

 

For more     "Royal Commission Report into WA Police Coruption" Part 1  

"Royal Commission Report into WA Police Coruption" Part 2

Appendix

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The conduct described in the previous chapter dealing with the evidence obtained in Operation Least Said revealed improper practices of general application among certain detectives of the Western Australia Police Service (“WAPS”) from 1985 until the early 1990s.

Those practices, which included the fabrication of evidence and perjury, were similar to those revealed by police corruption inquiries elsewhere, including the Wood Royal Commission (1997) in New South Wales, which commenced in the mid 1990s. It would therefore not be unreasonable to expect that there could be a risk of corrupt practices being employed in cases in which members of both Police Services operated together.

Evidence obtained by the Royal Commission showed that risk to be real.

In public hearings the Royal Commission heard evidence to the effect that officers of the Western Australia and New South Wales Police Services combined resources to fabricate evidence. One of the allegations arose out of the extradition of a prisoner from Western Australia to New South Wales in 1987. The other involved the extradition of a prisoner from the United States of America to Western Australia via New South Wales in 1989. The twoters are quite separate, but similar in that, in both instances, it is alleged that verbal admissions were fabricated in order to strengthen the cases against the prisoners.

The investigation was based upon information provided to the Royal Commission by the  Police Integrity Commission (“PIC”) in New South Wales as a result of its Operation Florida. In 1998, a member of the New South Wales Police Service started to co-operate with the New South Wales Crime Commission (“NSWCC”). In the weeks that followed, this officer embarked upon a process of debriefing, during which he revealed many instances of corrupt conduct in which he had been a participant with others. This officer, in co-operation with the NSWCC, continued in his duties as a police officer for a period of twelve months, during which time he had a number of conversations with colleagues that were recorded. In particular, a number of incriminating conversations with a colleague were recorded. Some of the recorded conversations were later led in evidence in the PIC hearings. The police officer and his colleague were referred to in the Royal Commission as F2 and F1
respectively.

During the course of his debriefing process, F2 nominated the 1989 extradition matter as one in which misconduct had occurred. As investigations continued, and further information