❓ Question regarding cost blow-outs and delays in the Perth-Mandurah railway project. Minister defends the project's cost management, citing comparative data and criticising opposition cost estimates.
AnsweredQoN 422Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PERTH-MANDURAH RAILWAY LINE
I refer the minister to the latest $50 million blow-out of the Perth-Mandurah railway line and remind her of a press release of July 2001 in which she stated - . . . the cost of the direct route will be contained within existing budget estimates. That was an amount of $1.2 billion. According to the Hansard of 20 August 2002, she stated - We are very confident that this project will be delivered on time and on budget. According to the Hansard of 2 October 2004 she used the words “on time and on budget”, and according to the Hansard of 27 April 2005, she stated - I make it clear that at this point in time we are still within budget. (1) Will the minister guarantee the people of Western Australia that there will be no further delays or cost blow-outs on this abysmally managed project? (2) How can we have any trust in the government’s ability to deliver major projects on time and within budget when it has repeatedly broken promises and fudged the figures? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN
I refer the minister to the latest $50 million blow-out of the Perth-Mandurah railway line and remind her of a press release of July 2001 in which she stated - . . . the cost of the direct route will be contained within existing budget estimates. That was an amount of $1.2 billion. According to the Hansard of 20 August 2002, she stated - We are very confident that this project will be delivered on time and on budget. According to the Hansard of 2 October 2004 she used the words “on time and on budget”, and according to the Hansard of 27 April 2005, she stated - I make it clear that at this point in time we are still within budget. (1) Will the minister guarantee the people of Western Australia that there will be no further delays or cost blow-outs on this abysmally managed project? (2) How can we have any trust in the government’s ability to deliver major projects on time and within budget when it has repeatedly broken promises and fudged the figures? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. I point out that this project has increased by 9.6 per cent since the time the government entered into the contracts in late 2003, and by some 17 per cent since we announced the revised route for the project in 2002. Quite frankly, I think this is an extremely good result for this project. It is a result that compares very, very favourably with results that have been obtained by the private sector, including mining companies. An opposition member interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Order! Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
(2) How can we have any trust in the government’s ability to deliver major projects on time and within budget when it has repeatedly broken promises and fudged the figures? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. I point out that this project has increased by 9.6 per cent since the time the government entered into the contracts in late 2003, and by some 17 per cent since we announced the revised route for the project in 2002. Quite frankly, I think this is an extremely good result for this project. It is a result that compares very, very favourably with results that have been obtained by the private sector, including mining companies. An opposition member interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Order! Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. I point out that this project has increased by 9.6 per cent since the time the government entered into the contracts in late 2003, and by some 17 per cent since we announced the revised route for the project in 2002. Quite frankly, I think this is an extremely good result for this project. It is a result that compares very, very favourably with results that have been obtained by the private sector, including mining companies. An opposition member interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Order! Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
(1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. I point out that this project has increased by 9.6 per cent since the time the government entered into the contracts in late 2003, and by some 17 per cent since we announced the revised route for the project in 2002. Quite frankly, I think this is an extremely good result for this project. It is a result that compares very, very favourably with results that have been obtained by the private sector, including mining companies. An opposition member interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Order! Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Order! Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
(2) How can we have any trust in the government’s ability to deliver major projects on time and within budget when it has repeatedly broken promises and fudged the figures? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. I point out that this project has increased by 9.6 per cent since the time the government entered into the contracts in late 2003, and by some 17 per cent since we announced the revised route for the project in 2002. Quite frankly, I think this is an extremely good result for this project. It is a result that compares very, very favourably with results that have been obtained by the private sector, including mining companies. An opposition member interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Order! Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. I point out that this project has increased by 9.6 per cent since the time the government entered into the contracts in late 2003, and by some 17 per cent since we announced the revised route for the project in 2002. Quite frankly, I think this is an extremely good result for this project. It is a result that compares very, very favourably with results that have been obtained by the private sector, including mining companies. An opposition member interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Order! Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
(1)-(2) I thank the member for the question. I point out that this project has increased by 9.6 per cent since the time the government entered into the contracts in late 2003, and by some 17 per cent since we announced the revised route for the project in 2002. Quite frankly, I think this is an extremely good result for this project. It is a result that compares very, very favourably with results that have been obtained by the private sector, including mining companies. An opposition member interjected. The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Order! Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER : Order! Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN : Those results have been achieved in similar infrastructure projects in the eastern states. Indeed, I would have to say that this is one of the best performing projects in terms of the management of the cost - 9.6 per cent since the awarding of the contract. I urge members opposite to go back to their encyclopaedia, The West Australian , and have a look at a series of articles that show the sorts of increases that are being experienced by mining companies in their project delivery. Indeed, members can go to The Australian and The Australian Financial Review and have a look at what is happening with civil construction in the eastern states. I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
I would just like to comment that the opposition shadow transport spokesperson, Simon O’Brien, was reported as saying that the opposition would have delivered the project much cheaper. He referred to the opposition’s costings of $1.147 billion, which was in 1998 figures; these were unescalated figures from 1998. When we apply just the standard escalation from 1998, we find that, in fact, the cost of the project would have been $1.9 billion to deliver. Not only have we got a much better project, but it is indeed much cheaper.
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.