❓ Question regarding the planning progress of the Liberal-National government's light rail project linking Mirrabooka to the city. The Minister provides an update, criticizes the opposition's stance, and addresses concerns about property resumption.
AnsweredQoN 683Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
MIRRABOOKA — LIGHT RAIL PROJECT
Can the minister please update the house on the planning of the Liberal–National government’s light rail project that will link Mirrabooka to the city, as outlined in the recently released public transport plan? Mr T.R. BUSWELL
Can the minister please update the house on the planning of the Liberal–National government’s light rail project that will link Mirrabooka to the city, as outlined in the recently released public transport plan? Mr T.R. BUSWELL
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for his question. I am pleased to update the house on the light rail plan that, through a route yet to be defined, will link Mirrabooka, and even more particularly Balga TAFE, with the city. As members would be aware, the public transport plan had a range of plans for the future of Perth and a number of transformational projects. This bus rapid-transit system to Ellenbrook is a transformational project. Of course it is opposed by members opposite who want to put rail to Ellenbrook and—as I always say—we look forward to seeing that in their election costings next year to support the bravado of the member for West Swan. I come back more particularly to the question from the member for Mount Lawley. Two things are currently happening with the light rail project. Firstly, preliminary route planning and an options analysis are being undertaken. Secondly, we began the consultation process with local governments. That includes the local governments of Stirling, Perth and Vincent, where I feel a meeting with the new mayor is a most urgent priority, as I watch—I have said this before in this place—the slow but steady emergence of the Campbell Newman of the Labor Party out of the City of Vincent! However, I am sure that the former member for Armadale will support this project wholeheartedly. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: I thank the member for his question. I am pleased to update the house on the light rail plan that, through a route yet to be defined, will link Mirrabooka, and even more particularly Balga TAFE, with the city. As members would be aware, the public transport plan had a range of plans for the future of Perth and a number of transformational projects. This bus rapid-transit system to Ellenbrook is a transformational project. Of course it is opposed by members opposite who want to put rail to Ellenbrook and—as I always say—we look forward to seeing that in their election costings next year to support the bravado of the member for West Swan. I come back more particularly to the question from the member for Mount Lawley. Two things are currently happening with the light rail project. Firstly, preliminary route planning and an options analysis are being undertaken. Secondly, we began the consultation process with local governments. That includes the local governments of Stirling, Perth and Vincent, where I feel a meeting with the new mayor is a most urgent priority, as I watch—I have said this before in this place—the slow but steady emergence of the Campbell Newman of the Labor Party out of the City of Vincent! However, I am sure that the former member for Armadale will support this project wholeheartedly. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
I thank the member for his question. I am pleased to update the house on the light rail plan that, through a route yet to be defined, will link Mirrabooka, and even more particularly Balga TAFE, with the city. As members would be aware, the public transport plan had a range of plans for the future of Perth and a number of transformational projects. This bus rapid-transit system to Ellenbrook is a transformational project. Of course it is opposed by members opposite who want to put rail to Ellenbrook and—as I always say—we look forward to seeing that in their election costings next year to support the bravado of the member for West Swan. I come back more particularly to the question from the member for Mount Lawley. Two things are currently happening with the light rail project. Firstly, preliminary route planning and an options analysis are being undertaken. Secondly, we began the consultation process with local governments. That includes the local governments of Stirling, Perth and Vincent, where I feel a meeting with the new mayor is a most urgent priority, as I watch—I have said this before in this place—the slow but steady emergence of the Campbell Newman of the Labor Party out of the City of Vincent! However, I am sure that the former member for Armadale will support this project wholeheartedly. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
I come back more particularly to the question from the member for Mount Lawley. Two things are currently happening with the light rail project. Firstly, preliminary route planning and an options analysis are being undertaken. Secondly, we began the consultation process with local governments. That includes the local governments of Stirling, Perth and Vincent, where I feel a meeting with the new mayor is a most urgent priority, as I watch—I have said this before in this place—the slow but steady emergence of the Campbell Newman of the Labor Party out of the City of Vincent! However, I am sure that the former member for Armadale will support this project wholeheartedly. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret.
Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
… “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing.
“It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL replied: I thank the member for his question. I am pleased to update the house on the light rail plan that, through a route yet to be defined, will link Mirrabooka, and even more particularly Balga TAFE, with the city. As members would be aware, the public transport plan had a range of plans for the future of Perth and a number of transformational projects. This bus rapid-transit system to Ellenbrook is a transformational project. Of course it is opposed by members opposite who want to put rail to Ellenbrook and—as I always say—we look forward to seeing that in their election costings next year to support the bravado of the member for West Swan. I come back more particularly to the question from the member for Mount Lawley. Two things are currently happening with the light rail project. Firstly, preliminary route planning and an options analysis are being undertaken. Secondly, we began the consultation process with local governments. That includes the local governments of Stirling, Perth and Vincent, where I feel a meeting with the new mayor is a most urgent priority, as I watch—I have said this before in this place—the slow but steady emergence of the Campbell Newman of the Labor Party out of the City of Vincent! However, I am sure that the former member for Armadale will support this project wholeheartedly. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
I thank the member for his question. I am pleased to update the house on the light rail plan that, through a route yet to be defined, will link Mirrabooka, and even more particularly Balga TAFE, with the city. As members would be aware, the public transport plan had a range of plans for the future of Perth and a number of transformational projects. This bus rapid-transit system to Ellenbrook is a transformational project. Of course it is opposed by members opposite who want to put rail to Ellenbrook and—as I always say—we look forward to seeing that in their election costings next year to support the bravado of the member for West Swan. I come back more particularly to the question from the member for Mount Lawley. Two things are currently happening with the light rail project. Firstly, preliminary route planning and an options analysis are being undertaken. Secondly, we began the consultation process with local governments. That includes the local governments of Stirling, Perth and Vincent, where I feel a meeting with the new mayor is a most urgent priority, as I watch—I have said this before in this place—the slow but steady emergence of the Campbell Newman of the Labor Party out of the City of Vincent! However, I am sure that the former member for Armadale will support this project wholeheartedly. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
I come back more particularly to the question from the member for Mount Lawley. Two things are currently happening with the light rail project. Firstly, preliminary route planning and an options analysis are being undertaken. Secondly, we began the consultation process with local governments. That includes the local governments of Stirling, Perth and Vincent, where I feel a meeting with the new mayor is a most urgent priority, as I watch—I have said this before in this place—the slow but steady emergence of the Campbell Newman of the Labor Party out of the City of Vincent! However, I am sure that the former member for Armadale will support this project wholeheartedly. Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Several members interjected. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : Let me say what has happened so far. We have had a lot of very positive feedback. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
The SPEAKER : Members! Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
The SPEAKER : Member for Perth! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : We have been very open. In fact, somehow a map of the proposal found its way into a state edition of a national newspaper a few weeks ago. I think this is a good outcome. I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
I got a bit of a shock the other week. It would appear that some of our optional planning work has fallen into the hands of none other than Hon Ken Travers. He has then looked at it and in his normal scientific way has thrown a blanket over a few affected households—I do not know quite how many; I suspect a lot—and he has written them a letter, which is in his normal way very accurate. The letter states — … the … Government is considering a proposal for light rail that will affect your home. It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret. A secret! It was in the newspaper a few weeks ago. We have been out talking to local governments about it. It is in the public transport plan. If that is how we keep a secret, we are in a bit of trouble on this side of the house! He then goes on — It … would result in the resumption and demolition of your home to make way for a light rail/bus interchange. That is false! That is an absolutely false statement! He then goes on — The public comment period closed on … 14 October … We do not even have a proposal! We are advertising! He is therefore writing to them saying, “They’re planning something; they’re going to knock your house down; quickly complain.” Leader of the Opposition, this is an outrageous thing to do. This is about an important piece of public infrastructure, a transformational light rail project. This is not how Hon Ken Travers should go about behaving. Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
It is extremely disappointing that they have chosen to keep this proposal a secret.
Mr E.S. Ripper : Does your plan involve the loss of those houses or not? Will you give an absolute guarantee that those houses will remain? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : If the Leader of the Opposition’s approach to the provision of public infrastructure is that it would never impact private property, I will go out to Great Eastern Highway and stop the addition of the third lane through the middle of his electorate this afternoon! Okay? It is easy. Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr E.S. Ripper : So the properties are going! Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : It is easy to apply one rule when the Leader of the Opposition wants to cause a bit of trouble. I was reflecting — Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr M. McGowan : Threatening? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : — on the propensity — Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr M. McGowan : Are you threatening the Leader of the Opposition? Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I threaten him often, my friend. That is what we do in this place. I have been temporarily diverted. I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
I was reflecting on similar comments Hon Ken Travers has made about other things. His comments are designed simply to cause panic and alarm in the community. I will quickly share some of them with the house. In April there was an issue about a train running from Midland through the city and on to Fremantle. In his well-informed, well-researched way, Hon Ken Travers said this — Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr E.S. Ripper : He gets under your skin; he’s putting you under pressure. Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
Mr T.R. BUSWELL : I do not mind having a fight with the reality of facts. Let me read this media release to the house. Hon Ken Travers said — The Barnett Government has once again put the safety of public transport passengers at risk after it was revealed a train driver was instructed to keep running after the brakes on a peak hour train failed twice. … “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing. Guess what? Independent research advises that there was no failure of the brakes. In fact, the investigation concluded that at no time were passengers placed at risk or was their safety compromised. The complementary systems in the brakes operated correctly and safe operating limits of deceleration were not compromised. The drivers had full control of the train at all times and were able to stop safely and correctly at all stations. If we are to engage in public policy debate, which is good, we should do it on the basis of facts, not on falsities that are designed to stir up public reactions that need not be stirred up. It is highly inappropriate to say that the brakes had failed when they had not. It is also highly inappropriate to write to a lot of people to say that the government will resume their houses when we have no plans to do that.
… “It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing.
“It is absolutely inexcusable to keep passengers travelling on a train where the brakes are failing.
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.