A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding delays in the ministerial council's recommendation on the East Perth power station's future, with the Minister citing cost and ongoing review as reasons for the delay.

AnsweredQoN 495Legislative Assembly
Asked
12 March 2003
Portfolio
Planning and Infrastructure

QuestionView source ↗

I refer to the ministerial council appointed in August 2001 - some 18 months ago - to consider the future of the state heritage-listed East Perth power station. (1) Will the minister confirm that the ministerial council was originally instructed to make a recommendation to Cabinet by November 2001? (2) Has Cabinet been presented with the council’s findings, and, if so, when? (3) If not, why not? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN

AnswerView source ↗

(1)-(3) This matter has been considered over many months and a variety of options have come to the ministerial council.  The ministerial council then sent them back for further work.  A final proposal is being considered as part of the budget process.  This is not an easy matter to deal with.  We have been very up front about the costs that are involved.  To restore the outside of the East Perth power station and deal with the contamination on site would cost something in the order of $15 million.  That is a very large expenditure and we are looking at how we may be able to fund that in a way that is acceptable to the community.  We are mindful of the value of this site from a heritage point of view, and we want to provide a long-term solution to this problem, but it is not easy when this level of expenditure is involved.  We do not resile from the fact that it has taken a long time for something to be done about this site.  An option is being considered and I hope that, as part of this budget process, the matter will be resolved.  It may even be resolved before the budget comes out in May.
(1) Will the minister confirm that the ministerial council was originally instructed to make a recommendation to Cabinet by November 2001? (2) Has Cabinet been presented with the council’s findings, and, if so, when? (3) If not, why not? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) This matter has been considered over many months and a variety of options have come to the ministerial council.  The ministerial council then sent them back for further work.  A final proposal is being considered as part of the budget process.  This is not an easy matter to deal with.  We have been very up front about the costs that are involved.  To restore the outside of the East Perth power station and deal with the contamination on site would cost something in the order of $15 million.  That is a very large expenditure and we are looking at how we may be able to fund that in a way that is acceptable to the community.  We are mindful of the value of this site from a heritage point of view, and we want to provide a long-term solution to this problem, but it is not easy when this level of expenditure is involved.  We do not resile from the fact that it has taken a long time for something to be done about this site.  An option is being considered and I hope that, as part of this budget process, the matter will be resolved.  It may even be resolved before the budget comes out in May.
(2) Has Cabinet been presented with the council’s findings, and, if so, when? (3) If not, why not? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) This matter has been considered over many months and a variety of options have come to the ministerial council.  The ministerial council then sent them back for further work.  A final proposal is being considered as part of the budget process.  This is not an easy matter to deal with.  We have been very up front about the costs that are involved.  To restore the outside of the East Perth power station and deal with the contamination on site would cost something in the order of $15 million.  That is a very large expenditure and we are looking at how we may be able to fund that in a way that is acceptable to the community.  We are mindful of the value of this site from a heritage point of view, and we want to provide a long-term solution to this problem, but it is not easy when this level of expenditure is involved.  We do not resile from the fact that it has taken a long time for something to be done about this site.  An option is being considered and I hope that, as part of this budget process, the matter will be resolved.  It may even be resolved before the budget comes out in May.
(3) If not, why not? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) This matter has been considered over many months and a variety of options have come to the ministerial council.  The ministerial council then sent them back for further work.  A final proposal is being considered as part of the budget process.  This is not an easy matter to deal with.  We have been very up front about the costs that are involved.  To restore the outside of the East Perth power station and deal with the contamination on site would cost something in the order of $15 million.  That is a very large expenditure and we are looking at how we may be able to fund that in a way that is acceptable to the community.  We are mindful of the value of this site from a heritage point of view, and we want to provide a long-term solution to this problem, but it is not easy when this level of expenditure is involved.  We do not resile from the fact that it has taken a long time for something to be done about this site.  An option is being considered and I hope that, as part of this budget process, the matter will be resolved.  It may even be resolved before the budget comes out in May.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) This matter has been considered over many months and a variety of options have come to the ministerial council.  The ministerial council then sent them back for further work.  A final proposal is being considered as part of the budget process.  This is not an easy matter to deal with.  We have been very up front about the costs that are involved.  To restore the outside of the East Perth power station and deal with the contamination on site would cost something in the order of $15 million.  That is a very large expenditure and we are looking at how we may be able to fund that in a way that is acceptable to the community.  We are mindful of the value of this site from a heritage point of view, and we want to provide a long-term solution to this problem, but it is not easy when this level of expenditure is involved.  We do not resile from the fact that it has taken a long time for something to be done about this site.  An option is being considered and I hope that, as part of this budget process, the matter will be resolved.  It may even be resolved before the budget comes out in May.
(1)-(3) This matter has been considered over many months and a variety of options have come to the ministerial council.  The ministerial council then sent them back for further work.  A final proposal is being considered as part of the budget process.  This is not an easy matter to deal with.  We have been very up front about the costs that are involved.  To restore the outside of the East Perth power station and deal with the contamination on site would cost something in the order of $15 million.  That is a very large expenditure and we are looking at how we may be able to fund that in a way that is acceptable to the community.  We are mindful of the value of this site from a heritage point of view, and we want to provide a long-term solution to this problem, but it is not easy when this level of expenditure is involved.  We do not resile from the fact that it has taken a long time for something to be done about this site.  An option is being considered and I hope that, as part of this budget process, the matter will be resolved.  It may even be resolved before the budget comes out in May.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more