WA Police Commissioner Col Blanch talks down severity of gaps in domestic violence offender GPS monitoring
WA Labor's flagship family and domestic violence laws mandated electronic bracelets for some serious, repeat perpetrators – but issues relating to the GPS tracking devices meant at least three offenders have been released on bail without them.
The laws were designed to add an extra layer of security for victims, with the former attorney-general at the time saying the GPS monitoring would only be lifted in "exceptional circumstances" against a "very high threshold".
But last month it was
The state government pinned the blame on mobile phone black spots and "technical limitations" while saying the courts and Department of Justice (DOJ) needed time to acclimatise to the new rules.
Commissioner faces questions
Questioned about the tracking issues on Friday, WA Police Commissioner Col Blanch shifted the focus to the courts.
Col Blanch speaks to ABC Radio Perth about the GPS tracking of serious and repeat FDV offenders.
(
ABC News: Jake Sturmer
)
"The entire conversation has been missed. If someone is carrying too much risk to be in a community, police have vigorously opposed bail at court," he told ABC Radio Perth.
"The conversation needs to go back to … 'why is the court bailing high-risk people?'
"I don't support high-risk people in our community … sex offenders or family violence offenders, they should be behind bars when there is a risk posed.
"If an electronic monitor is taken off someone and they pose an immediate risk, they're probably too high risk for us, but that is a decision for the courts, not police."
The commissioner's stance mirrors comments made by WA Premier Roger Cook in the wake of the revelations about issues with GPS tracking outside of Perth.
"Quite frankly, if the courts cannot make an arrangement whereby an accused serial domestic violence offender cannot be properly monitored, they need to be put behind bars," he said on April 15.
'Just technical stuff'
Documents seen by the ABC have revealed
Photo shows
Man in suit behind podium and microphone talking.
A letter has revealed just how the implementation of WA's domestic violence strategy targeting repeat offenders went so badly wrong.
It included a letter from Corrective Services Commissioner Brad Royce to the police commissioner stating the DOJ "will not recommend or support" GPS tracking outside of Perth.
Commissioner Blanch said the issue boiled down to "administrative issues with the technology".
"We need to fix the machine, there's something wrong, it's not charging properly, needs a better battery, whatever. Just technical stuff," he said.
"Because of the increase in volume [of FDV offenders being required to wear the bracelets] and because of the increase in technical faults, albeit small, they've said 'we're struggling to get people into regional areas at times to fix these small technical faults'."
"If there's a deliberate breach by the offender, police are rolling 24/7, we are out —we're capturing these people who breach.
"But if there's something wrong from an IT perspective or administrative function that needs fixing, sometimes staff are not available after hours from Department of Corrections to do that, and Corrections saw that as a risk."
Corrective Services Minister Paul Papalia said on Thursday there had been updated advice from the corrective services commissioner to the courts asking for "additional conditions" to be considered outside of GPS tracking.
In the letter, which the minister provided to the ABC, Commissioner Royce stated electronic monitoring was only suitable for accused offenders who were eligible for bail in any case.
Loading
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
2 hours ago
- Sky News AU
‘Failure of leadership': Jacinta Allan accused of putting children ‘at risk' after latest Working With Children Check revelations
Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan has been accused of putting children at risk after the Labor leader was unable to guarantee a former childcare worker sacked for sexual misconduct would have his Working With Children's Check (WWCC) cancelled. The ABC revealed on Wednesday that a Victorian childcare worker had been blacklisted from the industry in 2020 over accusations of grooming, kissing toddlers, and attempting to organise unsanctioned catch-ups and offer babysitting services. When alerted to the incident, Premier Allan said the process to cancel the man's WWCC was underway. However on Thursday the Victorian Premier was unable to provide a timeline for how long the process would take - or provide a guarantee the man would indeed be stripped of his WWCC. 'What's occurred here is just not acceptable. It demonstrates why the system needs to be strengthened and why we have taken action to strengthen the system and more will be done when we receive the rapid review report,' Ms Allan told reporters. 'In regards to this individual, the advice I had yesterday remains the advice today; that urgent steps are being taken to go through the process of cancelling this particular individual's Working With Children's Check as soon as possible.' Pressed on the timeline for a decision, the Victorian Premier said she was 'just not in a position to comment on individual cases'. The comments prompted a heated response from the Victorian Opposition, with Shadow Attorney General Michael O'Brien and Shadow Education Minister Jess Willson accusing the Premier of placing children at 'unacceptable risk'. 'Premier Jacinta Allan's continued refusal to take decisive action to protect children in childcare and educational settings is a failure of leadership,' the two Shadow Ministers said in a joint statement. 'More than 24 hours on from revelations that an individual dismissed from a childcare centre for grooming and kissing children still has an active Working With Children Check and the Premier still cannot guarantee when this individual's WWCC will be revoked.' The opposition frontbenchers said the loopholes that enabled the situation to occur would have been addressed by a bill introduced in Parliament by the Liberals and Nationals last week. 'Instead of supporting this new legislation, Premier Jacinta Allan blocked these laws and continues to place children at unacceptable risk,' they said. 'The Premier and Victorian Government must put politics aside, work with the Parliament and pass these laws now." The Victorian government is also under pressure to release the findings of its Rapid Child Safety Review as soon as possible. The review was launched after shocking allegations against Victorian childcare Worker Joshua Brown, who worked across 23 childcare centres and has been charged with more than 70 offences, including sexual assault. Premier Allan said on Thursday the report would be released "as soon as possible" but the government needed time to consider the findings. 'There will need to be a period of time for the government to consider and provide its thoughtful, detailed response to the rapid review,'Ms Allan said. 'But I want that response to be as soon as possible – not weeks.'
Sky News AU
5 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Parents hit back at Premier Jacinta Allan after extraordinary attack on concerns about a ‘school to gender clinic pipeline'
A group of parents with kids suffering from gender dysphoria have hit back at Premier Jacinta Allan after the Labor leader launched an extraordinary attack on parents concerned about the teaching of radical gender theory in Victorian schools. The Australian revealed on Thursday that the Victorian Department of Education had quietly updated its Respectful Relationships program to include content that teaches kids as young as five their biological sex may not align with their gender identity. The report included concerns from a spokeswoman from Parents of Adolescents with Gender Distress there was a 'school to gender clinic pipeline' which was pushing kids towards irreversible medical interventions. Premier Allan blasted the reporting during a press conference on Thursday, claiming the Respectful Relationships program was 'all about protecting kids, strengthening resilience of kids and supporting kids to be who they are across our schools'. The Premier then took aim at the parents' concerns, branding them 'disgraceful, nonsense' and claiming 'transgender kids are 15 times more likely to kill themselves'. In a letter responding to the Premier, the Parents of Adolescents with Gender Distress accused Ms Allan of making 'alarmist and irresponsible claims' in relations to suicide which were not supported by data. 'You made the alarming suggestion of a 15 times higher rate of suicide amongst transgender children. We believe this figure comes from survey data and concerned thoughts of suicide rather than completed suicide,' the parents wrote. 'Data shows suicide rates for transgender youth, while elevated, remain extremely low, and as many also suffer from co-occurring conditions (ASD (autism spectrum disorder), eating disorders, anxiety) which have similar levels of risk, a direct correlation can't be made,' the parents wrote. 'Neither affirmation nor medicalisation impacts this suicide risk or suicidal ideation and there is no evidence that programs introducing unevidenced concepts of 'gender identity' are beneficial to the mental health of children or adolescents. The parent group's concerns are supported by findings from a comprehensive independent review into gender dysphoria treatment in the UK found that 'the evidence does not adequately support the claim that gender affirming treatment reduces suicide risk'. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare's website also states there is 'no reliable national data on rates of suicide and self-harm among LGBTIQ+ communities in Australia'. In their letter to Ms Allan, Parents of Adolescents with Gender Distress requested the Premier meet with them to hear about their experiences – noting Education Minister Ben Carroll and his departmental secretary had 'refused to engage' with their attempts to organise a meeting for the past year. In its report on Thursday, the Australian revealed new content had been added to the Respectful Relationships program. The content, aimed at kids in their first year of primary school, includes a case study involving a transgender girl named "Stacey" who wants to play on the boys sport team. The curriculum also seeks to educate the five and six-year-old students about the notion of being transgender, by telling them that 'some people feel they did not get a good match for their body parts, and they do not want to be called a boy or a girl, but rather something that is right for them'. Parents of Adolescents with Gender Distress's letter states the group 'believe these programs which invite children to question their sex, and therefore their comfort in their own bodies, based on stereotypes, create unnecessary anxiety and confusion, particularly for gender-nonconforming or neurodiverse children. 'We hope that in the spirit of inclusivity you could meet with us to hear our personal stories.' Speaking to Sky News Australian on Thursday evening, Queensland Psychiatrist Andrew Amos agreed the content in the curriculum could be 'extremely harmful to kids'. Dr Amos said kids start to develop an understanding of sex characteristics at a reasonably young age, but this is mostly at the level of play. 'The way that kids learn is that they play with ideas, they play with clothes, they play with toys. What's happening, though, is in the school and in the clinic, people with a very strong political idea about what should happen with kids are then pushing them into a pipeline that really will follow them for the rest of their lives and do a lot of harm to them,' he said. 'We haven't got any good evidence that it helps kids and we know that it does significant and irreversible harm to them. 'So yeah, I think it's extremely inappropriate to be teaching five-year-olds, this sort of sexualized idea that you can be born into the wrong body.'
West Australian
11 hours ago
- West Australian
Michaelia Cash: Anthony Albanese's Palestinian statehood push is a reward for terror
When Anthony Albanese announced that Australia would unilaterally recognise a Palestinian state, he claimed it was a 'practical contribution to peace'. It was nothing of the sort. It was a gift to Hamas, proof of which came just 48 hours later when Mr Albanese was praised by the terrorist group for his decision. When terrorists congratulate your foreign policy, you are doing something very wrong. The endorsement of Sheikh Hassan Yousef, co-founder of the terrorist group Hamas, of Mr Albanese's decision to recognise Palestine as a state should horrify all Australians. That's the same listed terrorist organisation responsible for the massacre of October 7, the kidnapping of hostages, and the ongoing rocket fire into Israel. You do not achieve peace by rewarding terrorists. All Australians should be appalled at the massive propaganda victory Mr Albanese has handed Hamas on a platter. Mr Albanese has been proven to be completely out of his depth on this vital foreign policy matter. He told Australians Hamas would reject his position to recognise a Palestinian state. The decision does not make the world a safer place, expedite the end of the conflict, deliver a two-state solution, see the free flow of aid, support the release of hostages or put an end to the terrorist group Hamas. Mr Albanese's decision is effectively unconditional recognition. It will go ahead in September, no matter what. Recognition before the hostages are freed, before Hamas is defeated, and before any security guarantees are in place is not diplomacy. It is dangerous naivety. It hands Hamas one of the strategic objectives they sought when they unleashed their campaign of terror in 2023. Recognition should come at the end of a genuine peace process, not at its beginning. It should be the culmination of negotiations in which both sides make real compromises, leading to a secure Israel and a secure Palestine living side by side. That was the bipartisan consensus in this country for decades. By breaking from that cautious, measured approach, Mr Albanese has abandoned the position that recognition must be conditional on the renunciation of terrorism, the release of hostages, and the recognition of Israel's right to exist. If recognition is to mean anything, it must be tied to clear, enforceable conditions. Mr Albanese himself has said these include: no role for Hamas in a future Palestinian state; full demilitarisation; recognition of Israel's right to exist in peace and security; free and fair elections; governance reform, financial transparency, and education oversight to prevent incitement to violence. But here's the problem: none of these conditions have been met. And worse still, Mr Albanese has given no timetable for when they must be. How will these conditions be enforced? What proof will be required? And if they are broken, will recognition be revoked, or will Labor simply turn a blind eye? These are basic questions any serious government would answer before making a major foreign policy decision. Mr Albanese has answered none of them. In truth, the Palestinian Authority, which Mr Albanese claims can deliver these guarantees, has a poor record of honouring its commitments. It has failed to comply with the Oslo Accords, continues to make payments to convicted terrorists and their families, and has not held proper elections in nearly 20 years. Worse, just last year, the Palestinian Authority signed the 2024 Beijing Declaration with Hamas, agreeing to form an interim unity government that would include Hamas, the very terrorists Labor now says will have 'no role' in a Palestinian state. Polling from the Palestinian Centre for Policy and Survey Research — based in Ramallah — shows about 40 per cent of Palestinians currently support Hamas. In Gaza, almost half still back them to govern. Recognising a Palestinian state now risks legitimising a terrorist organisation with significant public support, entrenching their power rather than isolating them. The US has been clear: it does not support unilateral recognition. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said that similar recognition by France actually caused talks with Hamas to collapse. Mr Albanese should also answer a simple question: what state is he recognising? A state with no agreed borders? No single government in control of its territory? No demonstrated capacity to live in peace with its neighbours? Australians want the war in Gaza to end. So do I. But that will not happen because of a symbolic gesture from Canberra. It will happen only when the conditions for peace are in place — and that means removing Hamas from the equation entirely. Until then, recognition is not just premature. It is reckless. And the Albanese Government's decision will be remembered as a political gesture that rewarded terror, weakened our alliances, and made lasting peace harder to achieve.
