❓ A parliamentary question regarding the construction of a railway station at South Perth, focusing on the government's plans, justification for past actions, costs, and potential benefits. The government's response indicates support contingent on sufficient patronage and cost justification.
AnsweredQoN 1056Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
RAILWAY STATION — SOUTH PERTH
I refer to the promise to construct a railway station at South Perth that the state government made during the debate regarding the sinking of the train line in the city. (1) What is the Barnett government’s vision for South Perth? (2) When does the Barnett government plan to build a rail station at South Perth? (3) If not within the next four years, why not? (4) How does the government justify the actions of the previous Labor government and the current government to the people of Western Australia, having spent significant funds in planning for a rail station at South Perth, including making modifications to the Kwinana Freeway at the time the Perth to Mandurah rail line was being constructed, the appointment of the architects to design the station and participation in a planning study to increase density to support a transit-oriented development precinct in the vicinity of the rail station, if such a station is not now going to be constructed in the foreseeable future? (5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
I refer to the promise to construct a railway station at South Perth that the state government made during the debate regarding the sinking of the train line in the city. (1) What is the Barnett government’s vision for South Perth? (2) When does the Barnett government plan to build a rail station at South Perth? (3) If not within the next four years, why not? (4) How does the government justify the actions of the previous Labor government and the current government to the people of Western Australia, having spent significant funds in planning for a rail station at South Perth, including making modifications to the Kwinana Freeway at the time the Perth to Mandurah rail line was being constructed, the appointment of the architects to design the station and participation in a planning study to increase density to support a transit-oriented development precinct in the vicinity of the rail station, if such a station is not now going to be constructed in the foreseeable future? (5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(1) What is the Barnett government’s vision for South Perth? (2) When does the Barnett government plan to build a rail station at South Perth? (3) If not within the next four years, why not? (4) How does the government justify the actions of the previous Labor government and the current government to the people of Western Australia, having spent significant funds in planning for a rail station at South Perth, including making modifications to the Kwinana Freeway at the time the Perth to Mandurah rail line was being constructed, the appointment of the architects to design the station and participation in a planning study to increase density to support a transit-oriented development precinct in the vicinity of the rail station, if such a station is not now going to be constructed in the foreseeable future? (5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(2) When does the Barnett government plan to build a rail station at South Perth? (3) If not within the next four years, why not? (4) How does the government justify the actions of the previous Labor government and the current government to the people of Western Australia, having spent significant funds in planning for a rail station at South Perth, including making modifications to the Kwinana Freeway at the time the Perth to Mandurah rail line was being constructed, the appointment of the architects to design the station and participation in a planning study to increase density to support a transit-oriented development precinct in the vicinity of the rail station, if such a station is not now going to be constructed in the foreseeable future? (5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(3) If not within the next four years, why not? (4) How does the government justify the actions of the previous Labor government and the current government to the people of Western Australia, having spent significant funds in planning for a rail station at South Perth, including making modifications to the Kwinana Freeway at the time the Perth to Mandurah rail line was being constructed, the appointment of the architects to design the station and participation in a planning study to increase density to support a transit-oriented development precinct in the vicinity of the rail station, if such a station is not now going to be constructed in the foreseeable future? (5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(4) How does the government justify the actions of the previous Labor government and the current government to the people of Western Australia, having spent significant funds in planning for a rail station at South Perth, including making modifications to the Kwinana Freeway at the time the Perth to Mandurah rail line was being constructed, the appointment of the architects to design the station and participation in a planning study to increase density to support a transit-oriented development precinct in the vicinity of the rail station, if such a station is not now going to be constructed in the foreseeable future? (5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(1) What is the Barnett government’s vision for South Perth? (2) When does the Barnett government plan to build a rail station at South Perth? (3) If not within the next four years, why not? (4) How does the government justify the actions of the previous Labor government and the current government to the people of Western Australia, having spent significant funds in planning for a rail station at South Perth, including making modifications to the Kwinana Freeway at the time the Perth to Mandurah rail line was being constructed, the appointment of the architects to design the station and participation in a planning study to increase density to support a transit-oriented development precinct in the vicinity of the rail station, if such a station is not now going to be constructed in the foreseeable future? (5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(2) When does the Barnett government plan to build a rail station at South Perth? (3) If not within the next four years, why not? (4) How does the government justify the actions of the previous Labor government and the current government to the people of Western Australia, having spent significant funds in planning for a rail station at South Perth, including making modifications to the Kwinana Freeway at the time the Perth to Mandurah rail line was being constructed, the appointment of the architects to design the station and participation in a planning study to increase density to support a transit-oriented development precinct in the vicinity of the rail station, if such a station is not now going to be constructed in the foreseeable future? (5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(3) If not within the next four years, why not? (4) How does the government justify the actions of the previous Labor government and the current government to the people of Western Australia, having spent significant funds in planning for a rail station at South Perth, including making modifications to the Kwinana Freeway at the time the Perth to Mandurah rail line was being constructed, the appointment of the architects to design the station and participation in a planning study to increase density to support a transit-oriented development precinct in the vicinity of the rail station, if such a station is not now going to be constructed in the foreseeable future? (5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(4) How does the government justify the actions of the previous Labor government and the current government to the people of Western Australia, having spent significant funds in planning for a rail station at South Perth, including making modifications to the Kwinana Freeway at the time the Perth to Mandurah rail line was being constructed, the appointment of the architects to design the station and participation in a planning study to increase density to support a transit-oriented development precinct in the vicinity of the rail station, if such a station is not now going to be constructed in the foreseeable future? (5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(5) Now that the Mandurah rail line has already been realigned for this purpose, what is the estimated cost to complete construction of a rail station at South Perth? (6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(6) Should this expenditure be regarded as an investment and not as a cost? (7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(7) What is the estimated volume of users at this train station, which would serve visitors to the very popular Perth Zoo and major events such as the Skyworks event and the Red Bull Air Race? (8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(8) Having regard to the previous question, what impact would there be in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, in addition to the impact of reducing vehicle journeys by visitors and commuters on arterial roads such as Kwinana Freeway and the Narrows Bridge and Causeway? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. In what is probably a first for me, members will be interested to know that my answer is shorter than the question. (1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(1) The government supports the construction of a viable railway station at South Perth. What is yet to be demonstrated is how and when sufficient patronage will be generated to make this possible. (2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(2) See (1). (3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(3) The timing will depend on a demonstration of plans that show how and when sufficient patronage will be generated. Preliminary analysis shows patronage would be low in the short term without significant densification of settlement and activity within walking distance of the proposed station. I understand the City of South Perth is aware of the challenge to achieve the densities required and is working to meet that challenge. (4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(4) The government is not required to justify the decisions of previous administrations. (5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(5) The latest estimate based on preliminary concepts is $31.7 million in 2008 dollar values. (6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(6) An investment, when justified. (7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(7) While I acknowledge the benefits that a station would provide to those travelling to Perth Zoo, the station cannot be justified for two singular events each year. (8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
(8) An evaluation of these factors would form part of the final evaluation and business case.
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.