❓ Question regarding freeway lane width reductions under the previous government, with the Minister responding by highlighting previous lane reductions for bus lanes and accusing the opposition of anti-rail sentiment. The Minister also addresses safety concerns and a report from the City of South Perth.
AnsweredQoN 338Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Yesterday on Radio 6PR the Leader of the Opposition said that if the width of the traffic lanes on the freeway is to be narrowed - Mr M.J. Birney: That is not a question. That is a statement. The SPEAKER: Order, member for Kalgoorlie! Mr J.N. HYDE: I say again, for the benefit of the grammatically illiterate, that he said that if the width of the traffic lanes on the freeway is to be narrowed, this is a serious safety issue that should be looked at. Can the minister, as one of the elders of our tribe and a mother of this Parliament with some corporate memory, tell us what lane width reductions occurred under the previous Government? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Mr M.J. Birney: That is not a question. That is a statement. The SPEAKER: Order, member for Kalgoorlie! Mr J.N. HYDE: I say again, for the benefit of the grammatically illiterate, that he said that if the width of the traffic lanes on the freeway is to be narrowed, this is a serious safety issue that should be looked at. Can the minister, as one of the elders of our tribe and a mother of this Parliament with some corporate memory, tell us what lane width reductions occurred under the previous Government? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
The SPEAKER: Order, member for Kalgoorlie! Mr J.N. HYDE: I say again, for the benefit of the grammatically illiterate, that he said that if the width of the traffic lanes on the freeway is to be narrowed, this is a serious safety issue that should be looked at. Can the minister, as one of the elders of our tribe and a mother of this Parliament with some corporate memory, tell us what lane width reductions occurred under the previous Government? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Mr J.N. HYDE: I say again, for the benefit of the grammatically illiterate, that he said that if the width of the traffic lanes on the freeway is to be narrowed, this is a serious safety issue that should be looked at. Can the minister, as one of the elders of our tribe and a mother of this Parliament with some corporate memory, tell us what lane width reductions occurred under the previous Government? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Mr M.J. Birney: That is not a question. That is a statement. The SPEAKER: Order, member for Kalgoorlie! Mr J.N. HYDE: I say again, for the benefit of the grammatically illiterate, that he said that if the width of the traffic lanes on the freeway is to be narrowed, this is a serious safety issue that should be looked at. Can the minister, as one of the elders of our tribe and a mother of this Parliament with some corporate memory, tell us what lane width reductions occurred under the previous Government? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
The SPEAKER: Order, member for Kalgoorlie! Mr J.N. HYDE: I say again, for the benefit of the grammatically illiterate, that he said that if the width of the traffic lanes on the freeway is to be narrowed, this is a serious safety issue that should be looked at. Can the minister, as one of the elders of our tribe and a mother of this Parliament with some corporate memory, tell us what lane width reductions occurred under the previous Government? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Mr J.N. HYDE: I say again, for the benefit of the grammatically illiterate, that he said that if the width of the traffic lanes on the freeway is to be narrowed, this is a serious safety issue that should be looked at. Can the minister, as one of the elders of our tribe and a mother of this Parliament with some corporate memory, tell us what lane width reductions occurred under the previous Government? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
I thank the member for Perth for this very interesting question. It is very interesting that the Leader of the Opposition has these serious concerns. This is just another extraordinary example of the Opposition’s anti-rail sentiment. When the Opposition was in government, it had no problem whatsoever with making reductions to the lane width on our roads to accommodate buses. I will take members through a few examples. When the former Government wanted to install an express bus lane on the Mt Henry Bridge, it reduced the lane width from 3.5 metres to 3.45 metres, but - shock, horror - we want to go 10 centimetres on the Narrows Bridge! The crucial difference between the Narrows Bridge and the Mt Henry Bridge is that the speed on the Mt Henry Bridge is 100 kilometres an hour and the speed on the Narrows Bridge is 80 kilometres an hour. When the former Government wanted to put a bus lane on the Causeway - another very busy road - it reduced the lane width from 3.1 metres to three metres. All of that was acceptable but it is not acceptable to put in rail. That demonstrates the myopia of members opposite. I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
I want to explain a little more about Mt Henry Bridge because it is even more interesting, and I know the Leader of the Opposition has concerns about these things. When the previous Government wanted to accommodate these bus lanes on the Mt Henry Bridge it, in fact, removed all the shoulders. There is now no shoulder whatsoever on the Mt Henry Bridge. This Government is concerned about that. We will, therefore, rectify that problem as part of the Perth urban rail development project. We will not do it on the cheap; we will put in 2.5 metre corridors on either side of the Mount Henry Bridge. Far from the Government’s compromising safety, we are making sure that the safety problems that may have been caused by the previous Government will be rectified by this Government. Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Mr C.J. Barnett: As long as you don’t drive on the road. That would be a major contribution to safety. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Cabernet Col should tell us about his trip to Clontarf. We would really like to hear about that. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
The SPEAKER: Members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: These concerns arose from a report drawn up by the planning officer at the City of South Perth. Yesterday the senior engineers from PURD and Main Roads met with the planning and engineering staff and commissioners of the City of South Perth. It was clear at the end of that meeting that there were no unresolved issues, but the Government was concerned about some of the research done by the relevant officers. For example, when we asked where they got the concern about salt from the sea spray shorting out the lines, the response was that they had read about it in the newspaper. If local government wants to be taken seriously, it must ensure that its comment is informed comment.
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.