❓ A parliamentary question regarding claims that the Minister for Transport misled the house about the affordability of the Ellenbrook rail link. The Minister denies the claims, leading to points of order and debate about quoting uncorrected Hansard.
AnsweredQoN 1036Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Ellenbrook Rail PROJECT — Public Transport Authority — Minister for Transport’s comments
(1) Is the minister aware of claims that he has misled the house; and, if yes, will the minister please outline those claims to the house and the circumstances surrounding those claims? (2) Is the minister aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable; and, if yes, will the minister please outline those plans? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
(1) Is the minister aware of claims that he has misled the house; and, if yes, will the minister please outline those claims to the house and the circumstances surrounding those claims? (2) Is the minister aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable; and, if yes, will the minister please outline those plans? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) Yes, I am aware of claims that I have misled the house. In fact, the claims were made in the media today at WAtoday .com.au. Hon Ken Travers was quoted as saying, “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment.” I do not know how long this is going to continue. This is a serious matter and I do not remember saying any such thing, but I referred to Hansard . Point of Order Hon KEN TRAVERS : Mr President, you made the comment yesterday that I can seek to make a point when I have been misrepresented. I have never said that the minister has misled the house. If he had lied to the house, I would have brought the claim to this place. The minister has just quoted that I claimed that he lied in his comments to a media outlet. That is very different from misleading the house. Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
(2) Is the minister aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable; and, if yes, will the minister please outline those plans? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(2) Yes, I am aware of claims that I have misled the house. In fact, the claims were made in the media today at WAtoday .com.au. Hon Ken Travers was quoted as saying, “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment.” I do not know how long this is going to continue. This is a serious matter and I do not remember saying any such thing, but I referred to Hansard . Point of Order Hon KEN TRAVERS : Mr President, you made the comment yesterday that I can seek to make a point when I have been misrepresented. I have never said that the minister has misled the house. If he had lied to the house, I would have brought the claim to this place. The minister has just quoted that I claimed that he lied in his comments to a media outlet. That is very different from misleading the house. Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(2) Yes, I am aware of claims that I have misled the house. In fact, the claims were made in the media today at WAtoday .com.au. Hon Ken Travers was quoted as saying, “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment.” I do not know how long this is going to continue. This is a serious matter and I do not remember saying any such thing, but I referred to Hansard . Point of Order Hon KEN TRAVERS : Mr President, you made the comment yesterday that I can seek to make a point when I have been misrepresented. I have never said that the minister has misled the house. If he had lied to the house, I would have brought the claim to this place. The minister has just quoted that I claimed that he lied in his comments to a media outlet. That is very different from misleading the house. Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
(1)-(2) Yes, I am aware of claims that I have misled the house. In fact, the claims were made in the media today at WAtoday .com.au. Hon Ken Travers was quoted as saying, “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment.” I do not know how long this is going to continue. This is a serious matter and I do not remember saying any such thing, but I referred to Hansard . Point of Order Hon KEN TRAVERS : Mr President, you made the comment yesterday that I can seek to make a point when I have been misrepresented. I have never said that the minister has misled the house. If he had lied to the house, I would have brought the claim to this place. The minister has just quoted that I claimed that he lied in his comments to a media outlet. That is very different from misleading the house. Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
(2) Is the minister aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable; and, if yes, will the minister please outline those plans? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(2) Yes, I am aware of claims that I have misled the house. In fact, the claims were made in the media today at WAtoday .com.au. Hon Ken Travers was quoted as saying, “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment.” I do not know how long this is going to continue. This is a serious matter and I do not remember saying any such thing, but I referred to Hansard . Point of Order Hon KEN TRAVERS : Mr President, you made the comment yesterday that I can seek to make a point when I have been misrepresented. I have never said that the minister has misled the house. If he had lied to the house, I would have brought the claim to this place. The minister has just quoted that I claimed that he lied in his comments to a media outlet. That is very different from misleading the house. Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(2) Yes, I am aware of claims that I have misled the house. In fact, the claims were made in the media today at WAtoday .com.au. Hon Ken Travers was quoted as saying, “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment.” I do not know how long this is going to continue. This is a serious matter and I do not remember saying any such thing, but I referred to Hansard . Point of Order Hon KEN TRAVERS : Mr President, you made the comment yesterday that I can seek to make a point when I have been misrepresented. I have never said that the minister has misled the house. If he had lied to the house, I would have brought the claim to this place. The minister has just quoted that I claimed that he lied in his comments to a media outlet. That is very different from misleading the house. Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
(1)-(2) Yes, I am aware of claims that I have misled the house. In fact, the claims were made in the media today at WAtoday .com.au. Hon Ken Travers was quoted as saying, “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment.” I do not know how long this is going to continue. This is a serious matter and I do not remember saying any such thing, but I referred to Hansard . Point of Order Hon KEN TRAVERS : Mr President, you made the comment yesterday that I can seek to make a point when I have been misrepresented. I have never said that the minister has misled the house. If he had lied to the house, I would have brought the claim to this place. The minister has just quoted that I claimed that he lied in his comments to a media outlet. That is very different from misleading the house. Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Several members interjected. The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
The PRESIDENT : Order! I do not think it is a point of order, but, by the same token, if the minister wanted to make a ministerial statement about these matters, the time to do so was at the beginning of today’s proceedings. If the minister is going to answer the question, this is his opportunity to do so, not to make a ministerial statement. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Thank you, Mr President. I am delighted to have the opportunity to answer a question. I assure you that I would never raise this matter as a brief ministerial statement because it clearly is not what brief ministerial statements are for. It contains all sorts of arguable and debatable matter. Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon Ken Travers : Suspend standing orders and we’ll bring on a debate about the matter. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I am accused of misleading the house or of lying, that is what the member opposite needs to do. I checked what I had said, because the only comments I have made on this matter were made yesterday in the house, as I certainly have not spoken to this news outlet. I referred to the uncorrected Hansard . Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon Sue Ellery : What are you doing referring to that? Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I believe the minister is about to quote from uncorrected Hansard . I do not believe that that is permitted under standing orders. I may be wrong and I am prepared to stand corrected by you, Mr President. My understanding is that members do not quote from uncorrected Hansard . Ruling by President The PRESIDENT : Members can quote the uncorrected Hansard , as long as they clearly identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . As all members know, there is a possibility that the uncorrected Hansard may have changes before the final, corrected version is published. The minister clearly identified that he was going to quote from the uncorrected Hansard . Point of Order Hon ADELE FARINA : I rise on a further point of order; and I do this with a lot of respect. Recently, from my recollection, a ruling was made when Hon Helen Bullock quoted from an uncorrected Hansard , and she was informed that that was not permitted. I would like to get some clarity on this issue because I am now confused. The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
The PRESIDENT : The position, as far as I am concerned, is that members have to identify the article they are quoting from. If it is the uncorrected Hansard , they must identify that it is the uncorrected Hansard . I do not recall the member being prevented from quoting from an uncorrected Hansard , and I do not think that is the situation. Members can quote from the uncorrected Hansard as long as they clearly identify it. Questions without Notice Resumed Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If I can get a word in! I am asserting that Hon Ken Travers has got it wrong, that the Leader of the Opposition has got it wrong and that Hon Adele Farina has got it wrong. I was checking the uncorrected Hansard to confirm my own memory of what I had said, and that is most certainly permitted. And I thank you, Mr President, for your ruling. When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
When I checked the uncorrected Hansard to find out what I had said about this matter, I found out I was right. I had said — After coming to government, I found out that no planning had been done and no money had been allocated, except in the context of the election promise that had been made. I am referring to the ALP election promise. That is what I said. However, the next thing I see, which was drawn to my attention, so others have seen it, is a quote attributed to Hon Ken Travers saying on the internet site that I outlined — Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon Ken Travers : Do you have a retainer from WAtoday ? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I have never spoken to them, ever! The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
The article reads — “The minister is just lying when he says there was not a costing in our election commitment,” Opposition transport spokesman Ken Travers said today. I thank Hon Nick Goiran for his concern in this matter, because his question gives me the opportunity to point out that I have not been lying when I have addressed the house. That is the first point that needs to be made. The second point is that if Hon Ken Travers did not say that, it is absolutely important that Hon Nick Goiran’s question gives him the opportunity to get up and say, “I did not accuse the Minister for Transport of lying”. I look forward to that happening. Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon Ken Travers : I did accuse you in the media, but based on your media comments, not on what you said in the house. If you read the article, you would understand that. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : It appears that Hon Ken Travers is very familiar with the article and will know that there are some other matters in that article that go to the second part of Hon Nick Goiran’s question about whether I am aware of any plans generated prior to the election that are claimed to demonstrate that the Ellenbrook rail link is affordable and, if so, whether I can outline those plans. I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
I cannot actually prove it, but I am aware that there are some plans that show that the Ellenbrook rail line is affordable. How do I know it? Hon Ken Travers tells us that, because he also is on the record as saying that, in the lead-up to last year’s state election, Labor had costed the railway and confirmed that the proposal was indeed affordable. Hon Ken Travers is sticking to his line that Public Transport Authority experts and the independent consultants are wrong and are feeding me a pack of lies when, in fact, this railway line is affordable because he has had it costed—that is, the Labor government had it costed. Therefore, I invite Hon Ken Travers, when he has the chance, to show us where his costings are. In 2008, members opposite had the resources of government. Where is the hard evidence that Labor based its $850 million promise on? That is what we need to see. Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon Ken Travers : Stop squirming and admit that you are breaking an election promise. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Hon Ken Travers is the one squirming because he was wrong, his leader was wrong and his mate on the back bench was wrong. Hon Ken Travers should stop getting out there and accusing people of telling lies and misleading the house.
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.