❓ A parliamentary question regarding a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and its potential impact on public and parliamentary scrutiny of railway construction. The Minister clarifies the process and reaffirms the government's commitment to scrutiny for major rail projects.
AnsweredQoN 715Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(b) since my question on notice No. 112 of Thursday, 12 September 2002, has the Minister had an opportunity to study the map laid on the table of the House; (c) if so, does the Minister now agree that the WAPC amendment would allow the Government to construct railways or light rail along any major arterial road specifically highlighted on this map, without the need for development approval; (d) if the Minister has not yet studied the map, why not; (e) if the Minister has not yet studied it, will she do so and provide a response; (f) does the Minister agree that any declaration of a ‘minor’ amendment effectively removes any requirement for public and Parliamentary scrutiny; (g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(c) if so, does the Minister now agree that the WAPC amendment would allow the Government to construct railways or light rail along any major arterial road specifically highlighted on this map, without the need for development approval; (d) if the Minister has not yet studied the map, why not; (e) if the Minister has not yet studied it, will she do so and provide a response; (f) does the Minister agree that any declaration of a ‘minor’ amendment effectively removes any requirement for public and Parliamentary scrutiny; (g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(d) if the Minister has not yet studied the map, why not; (e) if the Minister has not yet studied it, will she do so and provide a response; (f) does the Minister agree that any declaration of a ‘minor’ amendment effectively removes any requirement for public and Parliamentary scrutiny; (g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(e) if the Minister has not yet studied it, will she do so and provide a response; (f) does the Minister agree that any declaration of a ‘minor’ amendment effectively removes any requirement for public and Parliamentary scrutiny; (g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(f) does the Minister agree that any declaration of a ‘minor’ amendment effectively removes any requirement for public and Parliamentary scrutiny; (g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(c) if so, does the Minister now agree that the WAPC amendment would allow the Government to construct railways or light rail along any major arterial road specifically highlighted on this map, without the need for development approval; (d) if the Minister has not yet studied the map, why not; (e) if the Minister has not yet studied it, will she do so and provide a response; (f) does the Minister agree that any declaration of a ‘minor’ amendment effectively removes any requirement for public and Parliamentary scrutiny; (g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(d) if the Minister has not yet studied the map, why not; (e) if the Minister has not yet studied it, will she do so and provide a response; (f) does the Minister agree that any declaration of a ‘minor’ amendment effectively removes any requirement for public and Parliamentary scrutiny; (g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(e) if the Minister has not yet studied it, will she do so and provide a response; (f) does the Minister agree that any declaration of a ‘minor’ amendment effectively removes any requirement for public and Parliamentary scrutiny; (g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(f) does the Minister agree that any declaration of a ‘minor’ amendment effectively removes any requirement for public and Parliamentary scrutiny; (g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(g) if so, how does the Minister reconcile this with the Government’s declared policy of community consultation and accountability; and (h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
(h) if not, what action will the Minister take to ensure that public and Parliamentary scrutiny remain priorities for the Government?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
16 June 2003
Responded by
Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
Response time
111 days
(a) All new railways whether in Railways or Road reserves under the Metropolitan Region Scheme will continue to require a Railways Enabling Act. Such legislation is always supported by reports about how the development of the railway is intended to occur and is subject to Parliamentary scrutiny.
Also, all new reserves for Railways and associated infrastructure will be made by way of Major Amendments under Section 33 of the Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act. The Act requires that these amendments are laid before both Houses of Parliament. Such amendments are always accompanied by explanatory reports on the results of the consultation processes required under the Act.
Revisions to the reserve alignment in the MRS for the South West Metropolitan transit route are currently proceeding by way of a major amendment to the MRS (No. 1032/33).
(b) Yes (Note: it is assumed that this is a map of Regional Roads in the MRS).
(c) No. Any new railway would need a Railway Enabling Act which would require Parliamentary approval.
If amendment 1060/33A (which is the amendment referred to in the question) proceeds to finalisation then the approval of the WAPC will not be required for the construction of rail track work and related infrastructure within the Regional Road reservation. Development approval under the Metropolitan Regions Scheme has never been a function of Parliament and nothing changes as far as Parliament is concerned with this amendment.
(d) Refer (b).
(e) Refer (b)
(f) No. If the WAPC decides that an amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme should proceed by way of the minor process under s33A Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act, the amendment takes effect following final approval by the Minister. The amendment is not required to be laid before both Houses of Parliament as is the case with a major amendment.
A Minor amendment, however, is subject to public scrutiny by way of notification of affected landowners, public advertising and the opportunity to lodge submissions. In order to broaden the opportunities for public consultation and comment, at my request, the Commission is also establishing hearing committees to hear submissions on minor amendments.
(g) The Government remains committed to maintaining and enhancing public and Parliamentary scrutiny for major rail projects.
(h) Refer (g).
Also, all new reserves for Railways and associated infrastructure will be made by way of Major Amendments under Section 33 of the Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act. The Act requires that these amendments are laid before both Houses of Parliament. Such amendments are always accompanied by explanatory reports on the results of the consultation processes required under the Act.
Revisions to the reserve alignment in the MRS for the South West Metropolitan transit route are currently proceeding by way of a major amendment to the MRS (No. 1032/33).
(b) Yes (Note: it is assumed that this is a map of Regional Roads in the MRS).
(c) No. Any new railway would need a Railway Enabling Act which would require Parliamentary approval.
If amendment 1060/33A (which is the amendment referred to in the question) proceeds to finalisation then the approval of the WAPC will not be required for the construction of rail track work and related infrastructure within the Regional Road reservation. Development approval under the Metropolitan Regions Scheme has never been a function of Parliament and nothing changes as far as Parliament is concerned with this amendment.
(d) Refer (b).
(e) Refer (b)
(f) No. If the WAPC decides that an amendment to the Metropolitan Region Scheme should proceed by way of the minor process under s33A Metropolitan Region Town Planning Scheme Act, the amendment takes effect following final approval by the Minister. The amendment is not required to be laid before both Houses of Parliament as is the case with a major amendment.
A Minor amendment, however, is subject to public scrutiny by way of notification of affected landowners, public advertising and the opportunity to lodge submissions. In order to broaden the opportunities for public consultation and comment, at my request, the Commission is also establishing hearing committees to hear submissions on minor amendments.
(g) The Government remains committed to maintaining and enhancing public and Parliamentary scrutiny for major rail projects.
(h) Refer (g).
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.