❓ Mr. Hyde questions the Minister for Planning about revised visitor number projections for the Perth Waterfront project, alleging discrepancies and demanding justification for the figures. The Minister defends the revised figures, citing an independent assessment and comparing them to other similar locations.
AnsweredQoN 65Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PERTH WATERFRONT PROJECT — PROJECTED
VISITOR NUMBERS
65. Mr J.N. HYDE to the Minister for Planning:
I refer to revelations yesterday that the government was
predicting that nine million visitors per year would visit Perth Waterfront.
That figure that has been revised in the stealth of the night on another
government website down to four million people.
(1) Given that
the minister failed to explain how the figure of nine million was calculated,
can the minister now advise how the revised figure of four million was
calculated?
(2) Another
Australian waterfront, Darling Harbour in Sydney, hosts only 1.3 million
visitors a year. How will the Perth Waterfront visitor figures surpass this by
300 per cent?
VISITOR NUMBERS
65. Mr J.N. HYDE to the Minister for Planning:
I refer to revelations yesterday that the government was
predicting that nine million visitors per year would visit Perth Waterfront.
That figure that has been revised in the stealth of the night on another
government website down to four million people.
(1) Given that
the minister failed to explain how the figure of nine million was calculated,
can the minister now advise how the revised figure of four million was
calculated?
(2) Another
Australian waterfront, Darling Harbour in Sydney, hosts only 1.3 million
visitors a year. How will the Perth Waterfront visitor figures surpass this by
300 per cent?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2)
It is the case that a figure of approximately nine million visits was predicted
initially. That was done on the basis of advice from Praxis Consulting, which
did an impact assessment of the development of the waterfront. That figure of
nine million was based on the total number of visits with multiple visits for
different purposes during the day by an individual being counted on multiple
occasions. The figure was revised to 4.3 million per annum by removing
references to multiple visitations during the day by visitors.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : I
know that it is the member for Midland's birthday, and I congratulate
her and wish her a happy birthday, but I formally call the member to order for
the second time today.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : The
member for Perth seems to think that he is on to something really big here and
I do not want him to be deluded, but the reality is that there is no subterfuge
or trickery by the government at all.
Mr M.P. Whitely :
You killed five million people overnight! You should take this seriously!
Mr P.C. Tinley :
Where are the bodies?
The
SPEAKER : I formally call the members for Willagee and Bassendean for the
second time. Some members may think that we are in an amusement parlour, but I
beg to differ.
Mr
J.H.D. DAY : The figure of 4.3 million —
Mr
P.C. Tinley : Where's Hoffa?
The
SPEAKER : I call the member for Willagee to order for the third time today.
Mr
J.H.D. DAY : The predicted figure of 4.3 million visits per year is the
figure that is now being communicated by the Metropolitan Redevelopment
Authority and the Department of Planning. The figure, as I said, is based on
the advice of an independent economic impact assessment undertaken by Praxis
Consulting, and I am sure that is well founded.
Mr J.N. Hyde : What
will the figure be tomorrow?
Mr J.H.D. DAY : By
comparison, I am advised—let me see if the member for Perth has an
estimate of the comparative figure for visitations to Kings Park.
Mr J.N. Hyde : You
said nine million yesterday and 4.3 million today. You're incompetent.
Mr
J.H.D. DAY : By the member's reckoning, what would it be for Kings
Park, for example?
Mr
J.N. Hyde : This is the Waterfront project. Cabinet has spent $440 million.
What was the figure you put up to cabinet? On what did these blokes here agree
to $440 million?
Mr
J.H.D. DAY : We know the member hates the fact that this project is
happening. It is happening in the member's electorate. This government
is spending more in his electorate than has ever been spent by any government
previously in actually making it a better place. We know the member hates it;
we know the Leader of the Opposition has a different position on it every day
of the week. But what we know is that this government is actually making it
happen. The member for Perth can get used to that idea.
For Kings Park the comparative
figure is actually 5.2 million visits per annum; for Federation Square in
Melbourne, it is 8.4 million visits per annum; and for Darling Harbour in
Sydney, it is actually 27.5 million visits per annum. The estimate is for 4.3
million visitations per annum to the Perth waterfront area. Bearing in mind
that it is in proximity to the Perth–Mandurah train line and the
underground Esplanade station, the fact that the ferries will come into the
area, the fact that the Esplanade bus station is in the area and the fact that
there will be many pedestrians and cyclists in the area, I think the figure of 4.3
million is entirely plausible.
It is the case that a figure of approximately nine million visits was predicted
initially. That was done on the basis of advice from Praxis Consulting, which
did an impact assessment of the development of the waterfront. That figure of
nine million was based on the total number of visits with multiple visits for
different purposes during the day by an individual being counted on multiple
occasions. The figure was revised to 4.3 million per annum by removing
references to multiple visitations during the day by visitors.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : I
know that it is the member for Midland's birthday, and I congratulate
her and wish her a happy birthday, but I formally call the member to order for
the second time today.
Mr J.H.D. DAY : The
member for Perth seems to think that he is on to something really big here and
I do not want him to be deluded, but the reality is that there is no subterfuge
or trickery by the government at all.
Mr M.P. Whitely :
You killed five million people overnight! You should take this seriously!
Mr P.C. Tinley :
Where are the bodies?
The
SPEAKER : I formally call the members for Willagee and Bassendean for the
second time. Some members may think that we are in an amusement parlour, but I
beg to differ.
Mr
J.H.D. DAY : The figure of 4.3 million —
Mr
P.C. Tinley : Where's Hoffa?
The
SPEAKER : I call the member for Willagee to order for the third time today.
Mr
J.H.D. DAY : The predicted figure of 4.3 million visits per year is the
figure that is now being communicated by the Metropolitan Redevelopment
Authority and the Department of Planning. The figure, as I said, is based on
the advice of an independent economic impact assessment undertaken by Praxis
Consulting, and I am sure that is well founded.
Mr J.N. Hyde : What
will the figure be tomorrow?
Mr J.H.D. DAY : By
comparison, I am advised—let me see if the member for Perth has an
estimate of the comparative figure for visitations to Kings Park.
Mr J.N. Hyde : You
said nine million yesterday and 4.3 million today. You're incompetent.
Mr
J.H.D. DAY : By the member's reckoning, what would it be for Kings
Park, for example?
Mr
J.N. Hyde : This is the Waterfront project. Cabinet has spent $440 million.
What was the figure you put up to cabinet? On what did these blokes here agree
to $440 million?
Mr
J.H.D. DAY : We know the member hates the fact that this project is
happening. It is happening in the member's electorate. This government
is spending more in his electorate than has ever been spent by any government
previously in actually making it a better place. We know the member hates it;
we know the Leader of the Opposition has a different position on it every day
of the week. But what we know is that this government is actually making it
happen. The member for Perth can get used to that idea.
For Kings Park the comparative
figure is actually 5.2 million visits per annum; for Federation Square in
Melbourne, it is 8.4 million visits per annum; and for Darling Harbour in
Sydney, it is actually 27.5 million visits per annum. The estimate is for 4.3
million visitations per annum to the Perth waterfront area. Bearing in mind
that it is in proximity to the Perth–Mandurah train line and the
underground Esplanade station, the fact that the ferries will come into the
area, the fact that the Esplanade bus station is in the area and the fact that
there will be many pedestrians and cyclists in the area, I think the figure of 4.3
million is entirely plausible.
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.