❓ The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure responds to a question regarding federal funding for the Peel Deviation project. She claims the previous government failed to make a formal submission and that the current government will start afresh to secure funding.
AnsweredQoN 176Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PEEL DEVIATION, FEDERAL FUNDING
What action was taken by the previous Government to get federal funding for the Peel deviation? Ms MacTIERNAN
What action was taken by the previous Government to get federal funding for the Peel deviation? Ms MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for this question. Our good friend, the member for Dawesville, has made great play in the local media about the need for Labor to attract federal funding for this important project. The project, I remind members, would cost in the order of $135 million. We take this seriously: it was always our intention to seek federal funding for this important project because we wanted to build on the work that the member for Dawesville assured us the previous Government had done. I asked Main Roads to go through its files and show us its submissions so that we could use them as the basis of seeking federal funds. Unfortunately, we found that a formal submission was never made to the federal Government for funding for the Peel deviation. It gets even more interesting because a submission was prepared in November 2000. It was more in the order of a shopping list of roads - not including the roads to Binnu and Tammin - for federal funding. Number four of the list of five includes the member for Dawesville’s much beloved Peel deviation. However, the former minister refused to sign the document. He said that he would take it on the plane and chat to John Anderson about it. We do not know whether the former minister ever had his chat, but if he did make a verbal submission, it was monumentally unsuccessful because, as we know, no money was forthcoming for the project. In the near future, I will be pleased to announce our strategy for this project. We now realise that we must start afresh because, unfortunately, the member for Dawesville has got it badly wrong. No activity was undertaken by the previous Government during its eight years to obtain funding for this road.
Ms MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for this question. Our good friend, the member for Dawesville, has made great play in the local media about the need for Labor to attract federal funding for this important project. The project, I remind members, would cost in the order of $135 million. We take this seriously: it was always our intention to seek federal funding for this important project because we wanted to build on the work that the member for Dawesville assured us the previous Government had done. I asked Main Roads to go through its files and show us its submissions so that we could use them as the basis of seeking federal funds. Unfortunately, we found that a formal submission was never made to the federal Government for funding for the Peel deviation. It gets even more interesting because a submission was prepared in November 2000. It was more in the order of a shopping list of roads - not including the roads to Binnu and Tammin - for federal funding. Number four of the list of five includes the member for Dawesville’s much beloved Peel deviation. However, the former minister refused to sign the document. He said that he would take it on the plane and chat to John Anderson about it. We do not know whether the former minister ever had his chat, but if he did make a verbal submission, it was monumentally unsuccessful because, as we know, no money was forthcoming for the project. In the near future, I will be pleased to announce our strategy for this project. We now realise that we must start afresh because, unfortunately, the member for Dawesville has got it badly wrong. No activity was undertaken by the previous Government during its eight years to obtain funding for this road.
I thank the member for this question. Our good friend, the member for Dawesville, has made great play in the local media about the need for Labor to attract federal funding for this important project. The project, I remind members, would cost in the order of $135 million. We take this seriously: it was always our intention to seek federal funding for this important project because we wanted to build on the work that the member for Dawesville assured us the previous Government had done. I asked Main Roads to go through its files and show us its submissions so that we could use them as the basis of seeking federal funds. Unfortunately, we found that a formal submission was never made to the federal Government for funding for the Peel deviation. It gets even more interesting because a submission was prepared in November 2000. It was more in the order of a shopping list of roads - not including the roads to Binnu and Tammin - for federal funding. Number four of the list of five includes the member for Dawesville’s much beloved Peel deviation. However, the former minister refused to sign the document. He said that he would take it on the plane and chat to John Anderson about it. We do not know whether the former minister ever had his chat, but if he did make a verbal submission, it was monumentally unsuccessful because, as we know, no money was forthcoming for the project. In the near future, I will be pleased to announce our strategy for this project. We now realise that we must start afresh because, unfortunately, the member for Dawesville has got it badly wrong. No activity was undertaken by the previous Government during its eight years to obtain funding for this road.
It gets even more interesting because a submission was prepared in November 2000. It was more in the order of a shopping list of roads - not including the roads to Binnu and Tammin - for federal funding. Number four of the list of five includes the member for Dawesville’s much beloved Peel deviation. However, the former minister refused to sign the document. He said that he would take it on the plane and chat to John Anderson about it. We do not know whether the former minister ever had his chat, but if he did make a verbal submission, it was monumentally unsuccessful because, as we know, no money was forthcoming for the project. In the near future, I will be pleased to announce our strategy for this project. We now realise that we must start afresh because, unfortunately, the member for Dawesville has got it badly wrong. No activity was undertaken by the previous Government during its eight years to obtain funding for this road.
In the near future, I will be pleased to announce our strategy for this project. We now realise that we must start afresh because, unfortunately, the member for Dawesville has got it badly wrong. No activity was undertaken by the previous Government during its eight years to obtain funding for this road.
Ms MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for this question. Our good friend, the member for Dawesville, has made great play in the local media about the need for Labor to attract federal funding for this important project. The project, I remind members, would cost in the order of $135 million. We take this seriously: it was always our intention to seek federal funding for this important project because we wanted to build on the work that the member for Dawesville assured us the previous Government had done. I asked Main Roads to go through its files and show us its submissions so that we could use them as the basis of seeking federal funds. Unfortunately, we found that a formal submission was never made to the federal Government for funding for the Peel deviation. It gets even more interesting because a submission was prepared in November 2000. It was more in the order of a shopping list of roads - not including the roads to Binnu and Tammin - for federal funding. Number four of the list of five includes the member for Dawesville’s much beloved Peel deviation. However, the former minister refused to sign the document. He said that he would take it on the plane and chat to John Anderson about it. We do not know whether the former minister ever had his chat, but if he did make a verbal submission, it was monumentally unsuccessful because, as we know, no money was forthcoming for the project. In the near future, I will be pleased to announce our strategy for this project. We now realise that we must start afresh because, unfortunately, the member for Dawesville has got it badly wrong. No activity was undertaken by the previous Government during its eight years to obtain funding for this road.
I thank the member for this question. Our good friend, the member for Dawesville, has made great play in the local media about the need for Labor to attract federal funding for this important project. The project, I remind members, would cost in the order of $135 million. We take this seriously: it was always our intention to seek federal funding for this important project because we wanted to build on the work that the member for Dawesville assured us the previous Government had done. I asked Main Roads to go through its files and show us its submissions so that we could use them as the basis of seeking federal funds. Unfortunately, we found that a formal submission was never made to the federal Government for funding for the Peel deviation. It gets even more interesting because a submission was prepared in November 2000. It was more in the order of a shopping list of roads - not including the roads to Binnu and Tammin - for federal funding. Number four of the list of five includes the member for Dawesville’s much beloved Peel deviation. However, the former minister refused to sign the document. He said that he would take it on the plane and chat to John Anderson about it. We do not know whether the former minister ever had his chat, but if he did make a verbal submission, it was monumentally unsuccessful because, as we know, no money was forthcoming for the project. In the near future, I will be pleased to announce our strategy for this project. We now realise that we must start afresh because, unfortunately, the member for Dawesville has got it badly wrong. No activity was undertaken by the previous Government during its eight years to obtain funding for this road.
It gets even more interesting because a submission was prepared in November 2000. It was more in the order of a shopping list of roads - not including the roads to Binnu and Tammin - for federal funding. Number four of the list of five includes the member for Dawesville’s much beloved Peel deviation. However, the former minister refused to sign the document. He said that he would take it on the plane and chat to John Anderson about it. We do not know whether the former minister ever had his chat, but if he did make a verbal submission, it was monumentally unsuccessful because, as we know, no money was forthcoming for the project. In the near future, I will be pleased to announce our strategy for this project. We now realise that we must start afresh because, unfortunately, the member for Dawesville has got it badly wrong. No activity was undertaken by the previous Government during its eight years to obtain funding for this road.
In the near future, I will be pleased to announce our strategy for this project. We now realise that we must start afresh because, unfortunately, the member for Dawesville has got it badly wrong. No activity was undertaken by the previous Government during its eight years to obtain funding for this road.
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.