❓ Question regarding the cost and budgeting for 93 new railcars, followed by a contentious answer from the Minister accusing the previous government of mismanagement and a flawed procurement process.
AnsweredQoN 463Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
NEW RAILCARS, NUMBER REQUIRED 463. Mrs HODSON-THOMAS to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure: I refer to the minister’s media statement dated 12 October 2001 announcing the Government’s decision to purchase 93 new railcars to service the southern rail line and the extension of the northern line to Clarkson. (1) How much will it cost the Government to purchase the 93 new railcars, and over how many budgets does the Government propose to spread this cost? (2) Is the minister aware of statements made at a forum on Wednesday, 17 October by the Perth Urban Rail Development Office that it was still unsure how many railcars would be necessary to service the southern rail link? Ms MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
NEW RAILCARS, NUMBER REQUIRED
I refer to the minister’s media statement dated 12 October 2001 announcing the Government’s decision to purchase 93 new railcars to service the southern rail line and the extension of the northern line to Clarkson. (1) How much will it cost the Government to purchase the 93 new railcars, and over how many budgets does the Government propose to spread this cost? (2) Is the minister aware of statements made at a forum on Wednesday, 17 October by the Perth Urban Rail Development Office that it was still unsure how many railcars would be necessary to service the southern rail link? Ms MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
(1) How much will it cost the Government to purchase the 93 new railcars, and over how many budgets does the Government propose to spread this cost? (2) Is the minister aware of statements made at a forum on Wednesday, 17 October by the Perth Urban Rail Development Office that it was still unsure how many railcars would be necessary to service the southern rail link? Ms MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
(2) Is the minister aware of statements made at a forum on Wednesday, 17 October by the Perth Urban Rail Development Office that it was still unsure how many railcars would be necessary to service the southern rail link? Ms MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Ms MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
(1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
[See paper No 790.]
NEW RAILCARS, NUMBER REQUIRED
I refer to the minister’s media statement dated 12 October 2001 announcing the Government’s decision to purchase 93 new railcars to service the southern rail line and the extension of the northern line to Clarkson. (1) How much will it cost the Government to purchase the 93 new railcars, and over how many budgets does the Government propose to spread this cost? (2) Is the minister aware of statements made at a forum on Wednesday, 17 October by the Perth Urban Rail Development Office that it was still unsure how many railcars would be necessary to service the southern rail link? Ms MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
(1) How much will it cost the Government to purchase the 93 new railcars, and over how many budgets does the Government propose to spread this cost? (2) Is the minister aware of statements made at a forum on Wednesday, 17 October by the Perth Urban Rail Development Office that it was still unsure how many railcars would be necessary to service the southern rail link? Ms MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
(2) Is the minister aware of statements made at a forum on Wednesday, 17 October by the Perth Urban Rail Development Office that it was still unsure how many railcars would be necessary to service the southern rail link? Ms MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Ms MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
(1)-(2) I thank the member for Carine for some notice of this question. It is virtually a dorothy dixer, because I enjoy the opportunity to put on the record exactly what a mess the previous lot made of the system. I have a copy of a cabinet decision sheet that sets out clearly that the previous Government made a decision that the railcars were not to be purchased by way of a private - Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Mrs Hodson-Thomas: Will you table the document? Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Ms MacTIERNAN: Absolutely. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I will send members opposite a photocopy. It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
It is clear that, contrary to many of the public statements that had been made, the decision had been made by the Cabinet that these railcars were not to be purchased, but rather they were to be subject to an operating lease. Point of Order Mr BARNETT: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. The minister is referring to a cabinet decision sheet. I ask whether that is a cabinet decision of this Government or the previous Government. If it is a decision of the previous Government, the minister should now or later explain how it has come into her possession. The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
The SPEAKER: The minister stated it was from the previous Government, and what the member asks may be appropriate at some later stage. The document is to be tabled, as I understand it. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: We find an extraordinary resistance on the part of the Leader of the Opposition for any of the decisions of his Administration to be a matter of public record. It was absolutely essential for this Government to have access to the cabinet decision sheet to understand the process, its contractual obligation, the basis of the tender documents and the reason they were drafted in that way. I do not have access to the cabinet submission, but it is important that the Government have access to the cabinet decision sheet. Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Mr Barnett: Not without approval. Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Ms MacTIERNAN: I am happy to take this up at another time. If the Leader of the Opposition is so ashamed of the decision made by his Government - Points of Order Mr BARNETT: I request that the minister immediately table that document. This is a most serious issue in the parliamentary process. Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
Mr KOBELKE: The Leader of the Opposition is trying to make a travesty of question time. The minister is answering an important question, and, because the answer may reflect negatively on the Leader of the Opposition, he is seeking to thwart the minister’s providing a proper response to the House. If he continues in this way, it may be up to the Speaker to not recognise him when he seeks to make a point of order. The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
The SPEAKER: It is my understanding that the document is to be tabled at the conclusion of the answer, and that is what the point of order is about. Questions without Notice Resumed Ms MacTIERNAN: Why did the purchase of the railcars, the contract for the acquisition of the railcars, have to be delayed? The reason is that the previous Government made a decision to proceed with the acquisition of these cars by way of an operating lease and not, as we thought, to put the matter out to the private sector for an assessment of the relative merits of acquisition by way of purchase or by way of operating lease. Treasury assessed that the proposals for private financing were not sustainable in that the additional cost that would be incurred by the taxpayers under an operating lease was not justified in the light of the risk transfer. On the basis of Treasury’s advice the Government was unable to proceed with the arrangement by private financing. However, it appears from advice we have had to date that, unfortunately, due to the way in which the tenders have been drawn up, it is not possible to undertake a direct purchase option. This is a direct result of that cabinet decision. The tender process for the provision of new electric railcars has had to be revised and the proponents have been asked to renew their submissions. The Government, more than anyone, regrets this process. As I said, this is not of our making; it is directly attributable to the previous Government’s decisions. [See paper No 790.]
[See paper No 790.]
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.