❓ Opposition questions the government about the cancelled feasibility study for the Ellenbrook rail line and lack of federal funding requests for public transport projects. The Minister defends the government's actions, citing overpriced tenders and strategic project selection for federal funding.
AnsweredQoN 381Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
railways — ELLENBROOK LINE
I refer to the story on WAtoday that states that a feasibility study to determine the route of the Ellenbrook rail line has been cancelled. (1) Did the state government seek financial support from the federal government on this project prior to cancelling the feasibility study? (2) Why did not the state government include any public transport projects in its request to the federal government for Infrastructure Australia funding? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
I refer to the story on WAtoday that states that a feasibility study to determine the route of the Ellenbrook rail line has been cancelled. (1) Did the state government seek financial support from the federal government on this project prior to cancelling the feasibility study? (2) Why did not the state government include any public transport projects in its request to the federal government for Infrastructure Australia funding? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I do not know where to start with this hopeless line of questioning. Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
(1) Did the state government seek financial support from the federal government on this project prior to cancelling the feasibility study? (2) Why did not the state government include any public transport projects in its request to the federal government for Infrastructure Australia funding? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(2) I do not know where to start with this hopeless line of questioning. Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
(2) Why did not the state government include any public transport projects in its request to the federal government for Infrastructure Australia funding? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(2) I do not know where to start with this hopeless line of questioning. Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(2) I do not know where to start with this hopeless line of questioning. Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
(1)-(2) I do not know where to start with this hopeless line of questioning. Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
(1) Did the state government seek financial support from the federal government on this project prior to cancelling the feasibility study? (2) Why did not the state government include any public transport projects in its request to the federal government for Infrastructure Australia funding? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(2) I do not know where to start with this hopeless line of questioning. Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
(2) Why did not the state government include any public transport projects in its request to the federal government for Infrastructure Australia funding? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(2) I do not know where to start with this hopeless line of questioning. Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(2) I do not know where to start with this hopeless line of questioning. Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
(1)-(2) I do not know where to start with this hopeless line of questioning. Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers : It is the same as you not knowing where to start with the railway line. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The house will move to rise at five, so I guess there is always some light. Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers and his parliamentary leader are pretty good at adding two and two and coming up with zero. Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers interjected. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Does the member want to hear the response? Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Apparently they have already made up their minds on what the government is doing about the Ellenbrook railway. It is saying that the government has cancelled any prospect of that project proceeding at all by virtue of something that somebody has seen on a website. That is why Hon Ken Travers and the temporary Leader of the Opposition, for as long as he lasts, should do their homework. Through a couple of simple questions they could have worked out a few things. If the government has anything to announce about the Ellenbrook railway, it will announce it. The opposition does not have to go making things up. Hon Ken Travers has become aware that as the government proceeded towards the feasibility study stage of this project, tenders were called. Can calling for tenders be regarded as abandoning a project? A number of tenders were received for a consultancy relating to some work on the Ellenbrook rail project. I could provide more information if the honourable member had given some notice of the question, but my recollection is that the Public Transport Authority reported to me that the tenders received were so overpriced and out of proportion to the work that needed to be done that it decided not to proceed with the tender. It was not because the government has abandoned the project, or because the people of Ellenbrook have been stranded because of a “rail promise broken”, as Hon Eric Ripper put it, but simply because we are getting good value for the Western Australian taxpayers’ dollar. The Public Transport Authority is pursuing other means to carry out that work to advance the Ellenbrook railway line. If the member has been out there today—I suspect he has, while the rest of us have been here—spinning some line that the government has abandoned the Ellenbrook project and that Ellenbrook residents are stranded without any public transport, and that if we do not get out there today with a shovel there will never be a railway, then he is wrong. He has jumped to the wrong conclusions and he has embarrassed his leader by getting him to release stupid media statements that are factually incorrect. After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
After that brief response, what was part two of Hon Ken Travers’ question? Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers : Part one was: did the minister seek support from the federal government? Part two was: why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : Part one becomes redundant because it is based on the incorrect premise that the government has abandoned the project because of a shortage of money, whereas if we had gone cap in hand to the feds, we would have been able to afford a feasibility study. That is just plain wrong. The second part of the question is — Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers : Why did the minister not include any public transport projects in the federal Infrastructure Australia funding request? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : If the honourable member wants a more detailed response, he can always ask the Premier, who is responsible for that. We did not submit a shopping list with 82 projects on it in the hope that one or two projects might be picked up; we targeted our projects. One of those was the Northbridge Link project, which has been presented, represented and reinforced in our submission to the federal government, primarily as a public transport initiative. Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon Ken Travers : How is it a public transport initiative? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : That just shows that the member does not know what he is talking about.
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.