❓ A parliamentary question regarding the cost and justification of a broadband telecommunications network trial in Victoria Park, questioning its prioritisation over regional infrastructure improvements. The Minister defends the project and highlights investments in regional areas.
AnsweredQoN 871Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORK TRIAL
I refer to the article on page 68 of The West Australian last Saturday that mentions Bright Telecommunications, which is a subsidiary of Western Power. (1) What is the total budgeted cost of the broadband telecommunications network trial in Victoria Park? (2) Why are those funds being used to roll out duplicate fibre-optic cable in the Premier’s electorate rather than being spent on improvements to Western Power’s ageing regional infrastructure network? Mr E.S. RIPPER
I refer to the article on page 68 of The West Australian last Saturday that mentions Bright Telecommunications, which is a subsidiary of Western Power. (1) What is the total budgeted cost of the broadband telecommunications network trial in Victoria Park? (2) Why are those funds being used to roll out duplicate fibre-optic cable in the Premier’s electorate rather than being spent on improvements to Western Power’s ageing regional infrastructure network? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for his question. Before I answer, does he support the $800 000 being spent in Kununurra and Wyndham to improve the quality and reliability of the service? Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
(1) What is the total budgeted cost of the broadband telecommunications network trial in Victoria Park? (2) Why are those funds being used to roll out duplicate fibre-optic cable in the Premier’s electorate rather than being spent on improvements to Western Power’s ageing regional infrastructure network? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: I thank the member for his question. Before I answer, does he support the $800 000 being spent in Kununurra and Wyndham to improve the quality and reliability of the service? Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
(2) Why are those funds being used to roll out duplicate fibre-optic cable in the Premier’s electorate rather than being spent on improvements to Western Power’s ageing regional infrastructure network? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: I thank the member for his question. Before I answer, does he support the $800 000 being spent in Kununurra and Wyndham to improve the quality and reliability of the service? Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: I thank the member for his question. Before I answer, does he support the $800 000 being spent in Kununurra and Wyndham to improve the quality and reliability of the service? Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
I thank the member for his question. Before I answer, does he support the $800 000 being spent in Kununurra and Wyndham to improve the quality and reliability of the service? Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
(1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
(2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
(1) What is the total budgeted cost of the broadband telecommunications network trial in Victoria Park? (2) Why are those funds being used to roll out duplicate fibre-optic cable in the Premier’s electorate rather than being spent on improvements to Western Power’s ageing regional infrastructure network? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: I thank the member for his question. Before I answer, does he support the $800 000 being spent in Kununurra and Wyndham to improve the quality and reliability of the service? Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
(2) Why are those funds being used to roll out duplicate fibre-optic cable in the Premier’s electorate rather than being spent on improvements to Western Power’s ageing regional infrastructure network? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: I thank the member for his question. Before I answer, does he support the $800 000 being spent in Kununurra and Wyndham to improve the quality and reliability of the service? Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: I thank the member for his question. Before I answer, does he support the $800 000 being spent in Kununurra and Wyndham to improve the quality and reliability of the service? Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
I thank the member for his question. Before I answer, does he support the $800 000 being spent in Kununurra and Wyndham to improve the quality and reliability of the service? Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Mr B.J. Grylls: I firmly support that project. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am glad the member supports something the Government is doing. Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
The SPEAKER: Order! Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
Mr E.S. RIPPER: Does the member not want an answer? (1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
(1) The estimated cost of completing this trial is less than $1 million. (2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
(2) Telecommunication civil works suitable for deployment of advance broadband have been deployed by Western Power in the following suburbs: Booragoon, Mt Pleasant, Claremont, South Perth, Como, Rivervale, Nedlands, East Victoria Park, Mt Lawley, Subiaco, West Leederville and a range of new housing estates. Broadband service pilot projects have been conducted in South Perth, Como and Victoria Park. It is a pity that the member for South Perth is not here, as I was going to ask him whether he supported the broadband pilot in South Perth. Western Power selected Victoria Park for the area broadband service for the following reasons: the diversity of housing and business premises meant a significant range of technical conditions could be tested in a small area at relatively low cost. Second, there was strong support for the project from the Town of Victoria Park. Third, power infrastructure in the specific pilot area was unlikely to be placed underground in the immediate future. However, it is located close to an existing underground infrastructure project in East Victoria Park that enabled some efficiencies to be achieved in utilising existing infrastructure. Telecommunications infrastructure is very important to the future of this State. It is behind the other States in the provision of telecommunications infrastructure. That could create obstacles to the State’s future economic growth. If the member thinks that agriculture and quarrying are sufficient for the future of this State’s economy in new international circumstances, he is sadly wrong. Of course agriculture and mining are important. However, we must do more than that if we are to develop economically. Telecommunications infrastructure can be an important part of that economic development. The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
The member wants to contrast that pilot with what is happening to the State’s electricity network. Within the south west interconnected system, Western Power has allocated $18.6 million in distribution capital to regional areas and a further $29.4 million in maintenance funding for 2003-04. Members might ask how we can judge whether that is the right expenditure. One way to judge is to compare that expenditure with what might have been spent in previous years. I refer to 2000-01 when the member’s colleagues were in government. The figures then were $11.9 million spent on distribution capital, $11.6 million on maintenance funding; $18.6 million and $24.9 million under Labor; and $11.9 million and $11.6 million under the Nationals. Those figures demonstrate conclusively where the weight of the argument lies.
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.