❓ A parliamentary question regarding the location of a proposed roundabout in relation to a designated Bush Forever site. The answer indicates the roundabout does not encroach on the protected area, resolving the concern.
AnsweredQoN 948Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to my question on notice 889 of 27 October. (1) Does the proposed roundabout on the new alignment of Old Mandurah Road at its intersection with Stakehill Road take in an area designated as Bush Forever site No 275, map sheet 75 in volume 1 of the “Bush Forever” publication of December 2000? (2) Does this accord with the parliamentary secretary’s answer to part (3) of question 889? (3) If not, why not? Hon KEN TRAVERS
AnswerView source ↗
The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(1) Does the proposed roundabout on the new alignment of Old Mandurah Road at its intersection with Stakehill Road take in an area designated as Bush Forever site No 275, map sheet 75 in volume 1 of the “Bush Forever” publication of December 2000? (2) Does this accord with the parliamentary secretary’s answer to part (3) of question 889? (3) If not, why not? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(2) Does this accord with the parliamentary secretary’s answer to part (3) of question 889? (3) If not, why not? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(3) If not, why not? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(3) Not applicable.
(1) Does the proposed roundabout on the new alignment of Old Mandurah Road at its intersection with Stakehill Road take in an area designated as Bush Forever site No 275, map sheet 75 in volume 1 of the “Bush Forever” publication of December 2000? (2) Does this accord with the parliamentary secretary’s answer to part (3) of question 889? (3) If not, why not? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(2) Does this accord with the parliamentary secretary’s answer to part (3) of question 889? (3) If not, why not? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(3) If not, why not? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
The question that I have has only two parts, but it is okay; I am happy to answer question (3). Question (3) will become irrelevant anyway. I thank the member for some notice of the question. I am advised as follows - (1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(1) The roundabout does not take in any of Bush Forever site No 275, which is located to the north of the proposed roundabout. (2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(2) Yes. (3) Not applicable.
(3) 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.