❓ Question on Notice regarding delays and budgetary allocations for the Greenwood and Clarkson train stations. The answer reveals a 12-month delay due to a change in railcar acquisition strategy from leasing to purchasing.
AnsweredQoN 1755Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
(b) what is the extent of the delays; (c) what is the reason for the delays; (d) when did the delays first become known; (e) what budgetary allocations had/have been made for the financial years ending 30 June 2001, 30 June 2002, 30 June 2003 and 30 June 2004 for both the Greenwood and Clarkson train stations; (f) for the financial years ending 30 June 2001 and 2002, have any of these budget allocations been used; (g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(c) what is the reason for the delays; (d) when did the delays first become known; (e) what budgetary allocations had/have been made for the financial years ending 30 June 2001, 30 June 2002, 30 June 2003 and 30 June 2004 for both the Greenwood and Clarkson train stations; (f) for the financial years ending 30 June 2001 and 2002, have any of these budget allocations been used; (g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(d) when did the delays first become known; (e) what budgetary allocations had/have been made for the financial years ending 30 June 2001, 30 June 2002, 30 June 2003 and 30 June 2004 for both the Greenwood and Clarkson train stations; (f) for the financial years ending 30 June 2001 and 2002, have any of these budget allocations been used; (g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(e) what budgetary allocations had/have been made for the financial years ending 30 June 2001, 30 June 2002, 30 June 2003 and 30 June 2004 for both the Greenwood and Clarkson train stations; (f) for the financial years ending 30 June 2001 and 2002, have any of these budget allocations been used; (g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(f) for the financial years ending 30 June 2001 and 2002, have any of these budget allocations been used; (g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(j) if not, why not?
(c) The previous government made the decision to proceed with the acquisition of railcars by way of operating lease. After advice was received from Treasury that such an arrangement would cost taxpayers an additional $25 million, a decision was made to purchase the new rail cars rather than lease them. Consequently, it was necessary to seek amended bids for the cars to be government owned, rather than a lease arrangement, and to obtain revised prices from the tenderers. (d) The decision to purchase the rail cars rather than lease them was made in October 2001. The rail car contract was signed on 10 May 2002. (e) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $752,000 $50,000 2002/03 $3,696,000 $1,000,000 2003/04 $4,718,000 $5,750,000 2004/05 $1,540,000 (f) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $395,000 (est) $50,000 (est) (g) Design fees (h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme. Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval. (i) Yes (j) Not applicable.
(d) The decision to purchase the rail cars rather than lease them was made in October 2001. The rail car contract was signed on 10 May 2002. (e) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $752,000 $50,000 2002/03 $3,696,000 $1,000,000 2003/04 $4,718,000 $5,750,000 2004/05 $1,540,000 (f) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $395,000 (est) $50,000 (est) (g) Design fees (h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme. Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval. (i) Yes (j) Not applicable.
(e) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $752,000 $50,000 2002/03 $3,696,000 $1,000,000 2003/04 $4,718,000 $5,750,000 2004/05 $1,540,000 (f) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $395,000 (est) $50,000 (est) (g) Design fees (h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme. Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval. (i) Yes (j) Not applicable.
(f) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $395,000 (est) $50,000 (est) (g) Design fees (h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme. Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval. (i) Yes (j) Not applicable.
(g) Design fees (h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme. Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval. (i) Yes (j) Not applicable.
(c) what is the reason for the delays; (d) when did the delays first become known; (e) what budgetary allocations had/have been made for the financial years ending 30 June 2001, 30 June 2002, 30 June 2003 and 30 June 2004 for both the Greenwood and Clarkson train stations; (f) for the financial years ending 30 June 2001 and 2002, have any of these budget allocations been used; (g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(d) when did the delays first become known; (e) what budgetary allocations had/have been made for the financial years ending 30 June 2001, 30 June 2002, 30 June 2003 and 30 June 2004 for both the Greenwood and Clarkson train stations; (f) for the financial years ending 30 June 2001 and 2002, have any of these budget allocations been used; (g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(e) what budgetary allocations had/have been made for the financial years ending 30 June 2001, 30 June 2002, 30 June 2003 and 30 June 2004 for both the Greenwood and Clarkson train stations; (f) for the financial years ending 30 June 2001 and 2002, have any of these budget allocations been used; (g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(f) for the financial years ending 30 June 2001 and 2002, have any of these budget allocations been used; (g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(g) if so, on what; (h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(h) if not, has the money been reallocated or returned to consolidated revenue; (i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(i) for the year ending 30 June 2003, will the budget allocations be spent on the respective stations; and (j) if not, why not?
(j) if not, why not?
(c) The previous government made the decision to proceed with the acquisition of railcars by way of operating lease. After advice was received from Treasury that such an arrangement would cost taxpayers an additional $25 million, a decision was made to purchase the new rail cars rather than lease them. Consequently, it was necessary to seek amended bids for the cars to be government owned, rather than a lease arrangement, and to obtain revised prices from the tenderers. (d) The decision to purchase the rail cars rather than lease them was made in October 2001. The rail car contract was signed on 10 May 2002. (e) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $752,000 $50,000 2002/03 $3,696,000 $1,000,000 2003/04 $4,718,000 $5,750,000 2004/05 $1,540,000 (f) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $395,000 (est) $50,000 (est) (g) Design fees (h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme. Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval. (i) Yes (j) Not applicable.
(d) The decision to purchase the rail cars rather than lease them was made in October 2001. The rail car contract was signed on 10 May 2002. (e) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $752,000 $50,000 2002/03 $3,696,000 $1,000,000 2003/04 $4,718,000 $5,750,000 2004/05 $1,540,000 (f) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $395,000 (est) $50,000 (est) (g) Design fees (h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme. Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval. (i) Yes (j) Not applicable.
(e) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $752,000 $50,000 2002/03 $3,696,000 $1,000,000 2003/04 $4,718,000 $5,750,000 2004/05 $1,540,000 (f) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $395,000 (est) $50,000 (est) (g) Design fees (h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme. Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval. (i) Yes (j) Not applicable.
(f) Clarkson Greenwood 2000/01 $68,000 2001/02 $395,000 (est) $50,000 (est) (g) Design fees (h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme. Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval. (i) Yes (j) Not applicable.
(g) Design fees (h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme. Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval. (i) Yes (j) Not applicable.
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
27 June 2002
Responded by
Minister for Planning and Infrastructure
Response time
44 days
(a) The Sunday Times was correct when it reported that rail services to Clarkson and Green wood would commence at the end of 2004.
(b) 12 months delay for both Greenwood and Clarkson stations
(c) The previous government made the decision to proceed with the acquisition of railcars by way of operating lease. After advice was received from Treasury that such an arrangement would cost taxpayers an additional $25 million, a decision was made to purchase the new rail cars rather than lease them. Consequently, it was necessary to seek amended bids for the cars to be government owned, rather than a lease arrangement, and to obtain revised prices from the tenderers.
(d) The decision to purchase the rail cars rather than lease them was made in October 2001. The rail car contract was signed on 10 May 2002.
(e)
Clarkson Greenwood
2000/01 $68,000
2001/02 $752,000 $50,000
2002/03 $3,696,000 $1,000,000
2003/04 $4,718,000 $5,750,000
2004/05 $1,540,000
(f)
Clarkson Greenwood
2000/01 $68,000
2001/02 $395,000 (est) $50,000 (est)
(g) Design fees
(h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme.
Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval.
(i) Yes
(j) Not applicable.
(b) 12 months delay for both Greenwood and Clarkson stations
(c) The previous government made the decision to proceed with the acquisition of railcars by way of operating lease. After advice was received from Treasury that such an arrangement would cost taxpayers an additional $25 million, a decision was made to purchase the new rail cars rather than lease them. Consequently, it was necessary to seek amended bids for the cars to be government owned, rather than a lease arrangement, and to obtain revised prices from the tenderers.
(d) The decision to purchase the rail cars rather than lease them was made in October 2001. The rail car contract was signed on 10 May 2002.
(e)
Clarkson Greenwood
2000/01 $68,000
2001/02 $752,000 $50,000
2002/03 $3,696,000 $1,000,000
2003/04 $4,718,000 $5,750,000
2004/05 $1,540,000
(f)
Clarkson Greenwood
2000/01 $68,000
2001/02 $395,000 (est) $50,000 (est)
(g) Design fees
(h) Total funding of the Perth Urban Rail Development project has been approved and funds have been allocated through the Capital Works Programme.
Project funds allocated in a particular year but not spent in the year will be retained for the project and carried forward into the subsequent year(s), with Department of Treasury and Finance approval.
(i) Yes
(j) Not applicable.
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.