❓ Mrs. Harvey questions the Minister for Health about unresolved lead contamination at Perth Children's Hospital and delays in its opening. The Minister accuses the opposition of siding with a contractor seeking a $300 million claim against taxpayers, hindering resolution.
AnsweredQoN 585Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PERTH
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL — LEAD CONTAMINATION
585. Mrs L.M. HARVEY to the
Minister for Health:
I refer to the
minister's decision on 20 April to take practical completion of Perth
Children's Hospital, and to the explosive testimony of John Hamilton in
a public parliamentary hearing last week.
(1) Can the minister
advise whether the lead issue is resolved; and, if not, why not?
(2)
If the lead issue is resolved, what are the issues preventing the opening of
the hospital, given the minister has been in charge now for seven months?
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL — LEAD CONTAMINATION
585. Mrs L.M. HARVEY to the
Minister for Health:
I refer to the
minister's decision on 20 April to take practical completion of Perth
Children's Hospital, and to the explosive testimony of John Hamilton in
a public parliamentary hearing last week.
(1) Can the minister
advise whether the lead issue is resolved; and, if not, why not?
(2)
If the lead issue is resolved, what are the issues preventing the opening of
the hospital, given the minister has been in charge now for seven months?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2)
I think the tenor of the member for Scarborough's question is, ''Is
it resolved, and are you just keeping the hospital closed because you want to?''
That is the sort of conspiratorial theory that the other side conjures up from
time to time. We have been no stranger to this. We know that the issues with
regard to lead in the water at the children's hospital are not
resolved. It is part of the dog's breakfast which was served up to us
by the outgoing government and which we now have to resolve. We will continue
to try to resolve those issues, and we are making good progress.
A significant
component of that work is the polyphosphate treatment process. The fact of the
matter remains that if we had not taken practical completion, we would not have
been able to apply the polyphosphate treatment process, because the managing
contractor at the time refused to allow that to happen. Why did they refuse to
allow that to happen? If they were to say, ''Yes, we will allow the
treatment process to happen'', that would undermine their claim that the
contamination is coming from outside the hospital. Why are they maintaining
that it is coming from outside the hospital? It is because their $300 million
claim against the WA taxpayer rides on that very contention. So the member for
Scarborough, like the Leader of the Opposition, has to ask herself the
question, ''Will I continue to maintain this argument that we should not
have taken practical completion, and side with this company, which has a $300 million
claim against us, or will I side with the people of Western Australia and the
sick kids who will be using that hospital, to ensure that we have a safe
hospital where they can get their treatment?'' The fact of the matter
remains that we took practical completion because we wanted to resolve the lead
issues. We could not do that, because of the managing contractor. We know who
the ally of the managing contractor is. It is that mob over there—those
people who, like the managing contractor, are quietly hoping that the $300 million
claim against the people of Western Australia works!
Several members
interjected.
Mr R.H. COOK : You should be ashamed of yourselves, you really
should! You have abandoned the people of Western Australia, the WA taxpayers,
and the sick kids who need care in that hospital, by your craven loyalty to
that company.
I think the tenor of the member for Scarborough's question is, ''Is
it resolved, and are you just keeping the hospital closed because you want to?''
That is the sort of conspiratorial theory that the other side conjures up from
time to time. We have been no stranger to this. We know that the issues with
regard to lead in the water at the children's hospital are not
resolved. It is part of the dog's breakfast which was served up to us
by the outgoing government and which we now have to resolve. We will continue
to try to resolve those issues, and we are making good progress.
A significant
component of that work is the polyphosphate treatment process. The fact of the
matter remains that if we had not taken practical completion, we would not have
been able to apply the polyphosphate treatment process, because the managing
contractor at the time refused to allow that to happen. Why did they refuse to
allow that to happen? If they were to say, ''Yes, we will allow the
treatment process to happen'', that would undermine their claim that the
contamination is coming from outside the hospital. Why are they maintaining
that it is coming from outside the hospital? It is because their $300 million
claim against the WA taxpayer rides on that very contention. So the member for
Scarborough, like the Leader of the Opposition, has to ask herself the
question, ''Will I continue to maintain this argument that we should not
have taken practical completion, and side with this company, which has a $300 million
claim against us, or will I side with the people of Western Australia and the
sick kids who will be using that hospital, to ensure that we have a safe
hospital where they can get their treatment?'' The fact of the matter
remains that we took practical completion because we wanted to resolve the lead
issues. We could not do that, because of the managing contractor. We know who
the ally of the managing contractor is. It is that mob over there—those
people who, like the managing contractor, are quietly hoping that the $300 million
claim against the people of Western Australia works!
Several members
interjected.
Mr R.H. COOK : You should be ashamed of yourselves, you really
should! You have abandoned the people of Western Australia, the WA taxpayers,
and the sick kids who need care in that hospital, by your craven loyalty to
that company.
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.