❓ Question on Notice regarding the City Rail Development project budget, specifically concerning demolition costs and asbestos removal at the old Myer site. The Minister provides answers confirming cost inclusions, awareness of asbestos issues, and estimated costs and timelines.
AnsweredQoN 197Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Given the city rail development project has been allocated a budget estimate of $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations - Hon Ken Travers: Don’t tell me you also hate trains? Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: I want something built in the country. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: Members opposite should visit the country and see what has been done. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon Ken Travers: Don’t tell me you also hate trains? Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: I want something built in the country. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: Members opposite should visit the country and see what has been done. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: I want something built in the country. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: Members opposite should visit the country and see what has been done. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: Members opposite should visit the country and see what has been done. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: Members opposite should visit the country and see what has been done. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(8) Not applicable.
Hon Ken Travers: Don’t tell me you also hate trains? Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: I want something built in the country. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: Members opposite should visit the country and see what has been done. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: I want something built in the country. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: Members opposite should visit the country and see what has been done. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: Members opposite should visit the country and see what has been done. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: Members opposite should visit the country and see what has been done. The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
The PRESIDENT: Order, members! Hon Murray Criddle has the call. Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon MURRAY CRIDDLE: They should look at what I did. I was referring to $195.5 million for all tunnel works and stations from the Narrows Bridge to the Northbridge portal near Lake Street as outlined in the Perth City Advisory Committee final report, and ask - (1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(1) Does the cost estimate of $52 million for the central station include the cost of demolition and removal of built form currently above the proposed underground platforms? (2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(2) If not, why not? (3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(3) Is the minister aware of the need to remove asbestos from the old Myer site prior to demolition? (4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(4) If not, why not? (5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(5) Will the minister table the cost of the removal of asbestos from the old Myer site? (6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(6) If not, why not? (7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(7) Has the time duration for asbestos removal been ascertained from WorkSafe, and if so can that advice be tabled? (8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(8) If not, why not? Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
Hon GRAHAM GIFFARD replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(1) Yes. (2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable. (3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(3) Yes. There has been ongoing discussion with the building owner on this matter for several months. (4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(4) Not applicable. (5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(5) The owner has advised a likely cost in the order of $4 million for asbestos removal from the old Myer building, not, it should be noted, the old Myer “site”. This is supported by advice from WorkSafe. (6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(6) Not applicable. (7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(7) Based on quotations for the work, the owner has advised that an 18-month period is required for asbestos removal from the entire old Myer building. WorkSafe has verbally advised that it agrees with this assessment. (8) Not applicable.
(8) Not applicable.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.