❓ Question regarding the Liberal Party's pledge to reinstate the Fremantle eastern bypass and Roe Highway stage 8. The Minister criticises the pledge as illogical and lacking substance, defending the Labor government's alternative transport plan.
AnsweredQoN 247Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the member for Murdoch’s pledge yesterday on behalf of the Liberal Party to reinstate the Fremantle eastern bypass and the construction of Roe Highway stage 8 at some future, far off time. Has this dodgy pledge any logic at all and would it contribute in any way to a sensible planning process in the South Metropolitan Region? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member very much for this question. I was truly surprised to see that pledge. It is extraordinary. It was interesting to read the fine print. I can assure the member for Riverton that it makes no positive contribution whatsoever to improving traffic or planning outcomes; it is just another example of the policy vacuum that is the Liberal Party. It was an intellectually lazy Government and it is an intellectually lazy Opposition. I advise members to closely read the pledge that was released yesterday. It was not a pledge to build the roads; it was a pledge to put some lines on a map. That is exactly the same strategy that the previous Liberal Government had. For eight years its single contribution to the traffic problems in the southern suburbs was to put a line on a map. It reinstated the Fremantle eastern bypass but made no attempt whatsoever to build it. I have previously quoted from an interview with the former Premier, Mr Richard Court. He made it clear that the former Government was not very keen about constructing the bypass. It wanted to wait until a community consensus was reached. That would have been a long time coming. Before the last election, the member for Murdoch’s partner in crime in this matter, Hon Simon O’Brien, appeared at a rally of 2 000 people and said he had grave concerns about stage 8 of Roe Highway. Point of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The member is contravening the standing orders by reflecting on a member in the other place. The SPEAKER: The standing orders are clear that members cannot reflect on a member in the other place. However, the minister’s comments were not on that level. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I thank you, Mr Speaker; that was a very sensible ruling that recognises an Australian colloquialism. The member for Hillarys might not be fully aware of Australian colloquialisms, but I will give him a lesson on them after question time. This important issue is very big in the southern suburbs. Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member very much for this question. I was truly surprised to see that pledge. It is extraordinary. It was interesting to read the fine print. I can assure the member for Riverton that it makes no positive contribution whatsoever to improving traffic or planning outcomes; it is just another example of the policy vacuum that is the Liberal Party. It was an intellectually lazy Government and it is an intellectually lazy Opposition. I advise members to closely read the pledge that was released yesterday. It was not a pledge to build the roads; it was a pledge to put some lines on a map. That is exactly the same strategy that the previous Liberal Government had. For eight years its single contribution to the traffic problems in the southern suburbs was to put a line on a map. It reinstated the Fremantle eastern bypass but made no attempt whatsoever to build it. I have previously quoted from an interview with the former Premier, Mr Richard Court. He made it clear that the former Government was not very keen about constructing the bypass. It wanted to wait until a community consensus was reached. That would have been a long time coming. Before the last election, the member for Murdoch’s partner in crime in this matter, Hon Simon O’Brien, appeared at a rally of 2 000 people and said he had grave concerns about stage 8 of Roe Highway. Point of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The member is contravening the standing orders by reflecting on a member in the other place. The SPEAKER: The standing orders are clear that members cannot reflect on a member in the other place. However, the minister’s comments were not on that level. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I thank you, Mr Speaker; that was a very sensible ruling that recognises an Australian colloquialism. The member for Hillarys might not be fully aware of Australian colloquialisms, but I will give him a lesson on them after question time. This important issue is very big in the southern suburbs. Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
I thank the member very much for this question. I was truly surprised to see that pledge. It is extraordinary. It was interesting to read the fine print. I can assure the member for Riverton that it makes no positive contribution whatsoever to improving traffic or planning outcomes; it is just another example of the policy vacuum that is the Liberal Party. It was an intellectually lazy Government and it is an intellectually lazy Opposition. I advise members to closely read the pledge that was released yesterday. It was not a pledge to build the roads; it was a pledge to put some lines on a map. That is exactly the same strategy that the previous Liberal Government had. For eight years its single contribution to the traffic problems in the southern suburbs was to put a line on a map. It reinstated the Fremantle eastern bypass but made no attempt whatsoever to build it. I have previously quoted from an interview with the former Premier, Mr Richard Court. He made it clear that the former Government was not very keen about constructing the bypass. It wanted to wait until a community consensus was reached. That would have been a long time coming. Before the last election, the member for Murdoch’s partner in crime in this matter, Hon Simon O’Brien, appeared at a rally of 2 000 people and said he had grave concerns about stage 8 of Roe Highway. Point of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The member is contravening the standing orders by reflecting on a member in the other place. The SPEAKER: The standing orders are clear that members cannot reflect on a member in the other place. However, the minister’s comments were not on that level. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I thank you, Mr Speaker; that was a very sensible ruling that recognises an Australian colloquialism. The member for Hillarys might not be fully aware of Australian colloquialisms, but I will give him a lesson on them after question time. This important issue is very big in the southern suburbs. Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Before the last election, the member for Murdoch’s partner in crime in this matter, Hon Simon O’Brien, appeared at a rally of 2 000 people and said he had grave concerns about stage 8 of Roe Highway. Point of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The member is contravening the standing orders by reflecting on a member in the other place. The SPEAKER: The standing orders are clear that members cannot reflect on a member in the other place. However, the minister’s comments were not on that level. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I thank you, Mr Speaker; that was a very sensible ruling that recognises an Australian colloquialism. The member for Hillarys might not be fully aware of Australian colloquialisms, but I will give him a lesson on them after question time. This important issue is very big in the southern suburbs. Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
The SPEAKER: The standing orders are clear that members cannot reflect on a member in the other place. However, the minister’s comments were not on that level. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I thank you, Mr Speaker; that was a very sensible ruling that recognises an Australian colloquialism. The member for Hillarys might not be fully aware of Australian colloquialisms, but I will give him a lesson on them after question time. This important issue is very big in the southern suburbs. Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member very much for this question. I was truly surprised to see that pledge. It is extraordinary. It was interesting to read the fine print. I can assure the member for Riverton that it makes no positive contribution whatsoever to improving traffic or planning outcomes; it is just another example of the policy vacuum that is the Liberal Party. It was an intellectually lazy Government and it is an intellectually lazy Opposition. I advise members to closely read the pledge that was released yesterday. It was not a pledge to build the roads; it was a pledge to put some lines on a map. That is exactly the same strategy that the previous Liberal Government had. For eight years its single contribution to the traffic problems in the southern suburbs was to put a line on a map. It reinstated the Fremantle eastern bypass but made no attempt whatsoever to build it. I have previously quoted from an interview with the former Premier, Mr Richard Court. He made it clear that the former Government was not very keen about constructing the bypass. It wanted to wait until a community consensus was reached. That would have been a long time coming. Before the last election, the member for Murdoch’s partner in crime in this matter, Hon Simon O’Brien, appeared at a rally of 2 000 people and said he had grave concerns about stage 8 of Roe Highway. Point of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The member is contravening the standing orders by reflecting on a member in the other place. The SPEAKER: The standing orders are clear that members cannot reflect on a member in the other place. However, the minister’s comments were not on that level. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I thank you, Mr Speaker; that was a very sensible ruling that recognises an Australian colloquialism. The member for Hillarys might not be fully aware of Australian colloquialisms, but I will give him a lesson on them after question time. This important issue is very big in the southern suburbs. Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
I thank the member very much for this question. I was truly surprised to see that pledge. It is extraordinary. It was interesting to read the fine print. I can assure the member for Riverton that it makes no positive contribution whatsoever to improving traffic or planning outcomes; it is just another example of the policy vacuum that is the Liberal Party. It was an intellectually lazy Government and it is an intellectually lazy Opposition. I advise members to closely read the pledge that was released yesterday. It was not a pledge to build the roads; it was a pledge to put some lines on a map. That is exactly the same strategy that the previous Liberal Government had. For eight years its single contribution to the traffic problems in the southern suburbs was to put a line on a map. It reinstated the Fremantle eastern bypass but made no attempt whatsoever to build it. I have previously quoted from an interview with the former Premier, Mr Richard Court. He made it clear that the former Government was not very keen about constructing the bypass. It wanted to wait until a community consensus was reached. That would have been a long time coming. Before the last election, the member for Murdoch’s partner in crime in this matter, Hon Simon O’Brien, appeared at a rally of 2 000 people and said he had grave concerns about stage 8 of Roe Highway. Point of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The member is contravening the standing orders by reflecting on a member in the other place. The SPEAKER: The standing orders are clear that members cannot reflect on a member in the other place. However, the minister’s comments were not on that level. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I thank you, Mr Speaker; that was a very sensible ruling that recognises an Australian colloquialism. The member for Hillarys might not be fully aware of Australian colloquialisms, but I will give him a lesson on them after question time. This important issue is very big in the southern suburbs. Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Before the last election, the member for Murdoch’s partner in crime in this matter, Hon Simon O’Brien, appeared at a rally of 2 000 people and said he had grave concerns about stage 8 of Roe Highway. Point of Order Mr R.F. JOHNSON: The member is contravening the standing orders by reflecting on a member in the other place. The SPEAKER: The standing orders are clear that members cannot reflect on a member in the other place. However, the minister’s comments were not on that level. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I thank you, Mr Speaker; that was a very sensible ruling that recognises an Australian colloquialism. The member for Hillarys might not be fully aware of Australian colloquialisms, but I will give him a lesson on them after question time. This important issue is very big in the southern suburbs. Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
The SPEAKER: The standing orders are clear that members cannot reflect on a member in the other place. However, the minister’s comments were not on that level. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I thank you, Mr Speaker; that was a very sensible ruling that recognises an Australian colloquialism. The member for Hillarys might not be fully aware of Australian colloquialisms, but I will give him a lesson on them after question time. This important issue is very big in the southern suburbs. Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Several members interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I crave your protection, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
The SPEAKER: The minister wishes to finish her answer quite quickly, I am sure. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Before the last election, Hon Simon O’Brien appeared at a rally of 2 000 people who had grave concerns about the environmental acceptability of stage 8 of Roe Highway. However, those concerns have suddenly evaporated and the Opposition now wants to build the highway. Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Mr M.F. Board: It will be sustainable. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: That is exactly right; a stage 8 of Roe Highway that will be sustainable. The Government has commissioned some estimates of the cost of constructing a sustainable, environmentally friendly Roe Highway stage 8. It could be contemplated in two ways: either as a bridge, which would cost $140 million, or as a tunnel, which would cost $500 million. Both options are pixie land. I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
I will make a further point to demonstrate the intellectual flaccidity of the members opposite. The Labor Government has proposed a six-point plan to deal with this matter. An important component of the plan is to get our freight off the road and onto rail. Over the next 15 years, we expect that 30 per cent of port container freight will be transported by rail rather than by road. Yesterday, the member for Murdoch raced around the Parliament and said that that could not be done. He said that the Government’s proposal was garbage and that it had not been done anywhere else. He said that a maximum of seven per cent of the port freight could be transported by rail. However, he did not introduce one shred of evidence to support that figure. I will share with members the reality of the situation. I will refer to two Australian ports. In New South Wales, 25 per cent of the freight transported into Sydney Port is transported by rail. The NSW Government has set a target to transport 40 per cent of all freight by rail. Currently, 20 per cent of freight to Melbourne Port is transported by rail. The Victorian Government has set a target to transport 30 per cent of its freight by rail by 2010. The laws of physics and the laws of economics remain the same across the Nullarbor. Such an increase in the amount of freight transported by rail is doable over east and it is doable here; however, it requires a Government that has vision and the capacity to think and act laterally.
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.