A parliamentary question regarding the demolition of the old Police and Citizens Youth Club building in Geraldton, focusing on potential asbestos regulation breaches and their impact on a nearby childcare centre. The Minister's response indicates ongoing investigation into the claims.

AnsweredQoN 503Legislative Council
Asked
21 November 2000
Portfolio
Works

QuestionView source ↗

I refer to the demolition, currently in progress, of the old Police and Citizens Youth Club building in Geraldton, adjacent to the Geraldton Community Education Centre. (1) Is the Department of Contract and Management Services in charge of this demolition site? (2) Are WorkSafe regulations - the code of practice - for the removal of asbestos cement NOHSC 2002 (1988) current and applicable on this site? (3) Have those regulations been breached? (4) Have breaches of those regulations been identified in a letter dated 16 November 2000 addressed to Mr Petricevic of CAMS? (5) Have complaints been lodged about these breaches since 8 November 2000? (6) What has been done to rectify these breaches? (7) Have these breaches caused the nearby child-care centre to be closed to students for several days now without adequate remedial action being taken by CAMS? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(1) Is the Department of Contract and Management Services in charge of this demolition site? (2) Are WorkSafe regulations - the code of practice - for the removal of asbestos cement NOHSC 2002 (1988) current and applicable on this site? (3) Have those regulations been breached? (4) Have breaches of those regulations been identified in a letter dated 16 November 2000 addressed to Mr Petricevic of CAMS? (5) Have complaints been lodged about these breaches since 8 November 2000? (6) What has been done to rectify these breaches? (7) Have these breaches caused the nearby child-care centre to be closed to students for several days now without adequate remedial action being taken by CAMS? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(2) Are WorkSafe regulations - the code of practice - for the removal of asbestos cement NOHSC 2002 (1988) current and applicable on this site? (3) Have those regulations been breached? (4) Have breaches of those regulations been identified in a letter dated 16 November 2000 addressed to Mr Petricevic of CAMS? (5) Have complaints been lodged about these breaches since 8 November 2000? (6) What has been done to rectify these breaches? (7) Have these breaches caused the nearby child-care centre to be closed to students for several days now without adequate remedial action being taken by CAMS? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(3) Have those regulations been breached? (4) Have breaches of those regulations been identified in a letter dated 16 November 2000 addressed to Mr Petricevic of CAMS? (5) Have complaints been lodged about these breaches since 8 November 2000? (6) What has been done to rectify these breaches? (7) Have these breaches caused the nearby child-care centre to be closed to students for several days now without adequate remedial action being taken by CAMS? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(4) Have breaches of those regulations been identified in a letter dated 16 November 2000 addressed to Mr Petricevic of CAMS? (5) Have complaints been lodged about these breaches since 8 November 2000? (6) What has been done to rectify these breaches? (7) Have these breaches caused the nearby child-care centre to be closed to students for several days now without adequate remedial action being taken by CAMS? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(5) Have complaints been lodged about these breaches since 8 November 2000? (6) What has been done to rectify these breaches? (7) Have these breaches caused the nearby child-care centre to be closed to students for several days now without adequate remedial action being taken by CAMS? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(6) What has been done to rectify these breaches? (7) Have these breaches caused the nearby child-care centre to be closed to students for several days now without adequate remedial action being taken by CAMS? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(7) Have these breaches caused the nearby child-care centre to be closed to students for several days now without adequate remedial action being taken by CAMS? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. (1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(1) No. The main contractor has possession of the site and is currently demolishing the PCYC building. The commissioned architect is undertaking the role of superintendent’s representative and is administering the contract with the main contractor. (2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(2) The specification includes a requirement for the main contractor to comply with all state and local statutes, regulations and by-laws. Extensive clauses cover the asbestos removal process. (3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(3) The main contractor has confirmed to the superintendent’s representative that the asbestos on the existing PCYC building was removed and disposed of in accordance with all statutory requirements. The superintendent’s representative is checking the neighbour’s claims that the regulations have been breached. (4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(4) The superintendent’s representative is currently examining the claims made by the neighbour in a letter dated 16 November 2000. (5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(5) Complaints have been raised by the neighbour who wrote the 16 November letter. (6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(6) The superintendent’s representative and representatives from the main contractor, CAMS Geraldton, CAMS Perth, Geraldton AGWA and the City of Geraldton health office have attended to the neighbour’s inquiries. The alleged breaches are being investigated. (7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.
(7) It is understood that a decision was made to send students home.

Explore WA Government Data

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

Explore more