❓ GRAIN RAIL NETWORK — LINE CLOSURES Four lines on the state-owned grain rail network have been closed today, putting 300 000 tonnes of grain onto roads. (1) What steps has the minister taken to determi
AnsweredQoN 624Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
GRAIN RAIL NETWORK — LINE CLOSURES
Four lines on the state-owned grain rail network have been closed today, putting 300 000 tonnes of grain onto roads. (1) What steps has the minister taken to determine what these rail closures will mean to the affected communities? (2) What steps has the minister taken to ensure that the impact on these communities can be properly managed? (3) What is the minister doing to stop the proposed closure of a further 1 000 kilometres of line by the end of the year? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
Four lines on the state-owned grain rail network have been closed today, putting 300 000 tonnes of grain onto roads. (1) What steps has the minister taken to determine what these rail closures will mean to the affected communities? (2) What steps has the minister taken to ensure that the impact on these communities can be properly managed? (3) What is the minister doing to stop the proposed closure of a further 1 000 kilometres of line by the end of the year? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
(1) What steps has the minister taken to determine what these rail closures will mean to the affected communities? (2) What steps has the minister taken to ensure that the impact on these communities can be properly managed? (3) What is the minister doing to stop the proposed closure of a further 1 000 kilometres of line by the end of the year? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
(2) What steps has the minister taken to ensure that the impact on these communities can be properly managed? (3) What is the minister doing to stop the proposed closure of a further 1 000 kilometres of line by the end of the year? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
(3) What is the minister doing to stop the proposed closure of a further 1 000 kilometres of line by the end of the year? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
(1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
(1) What steps has the minister taken to determine what these rail closures will mean to the affected communities? (2) What steps has the minister taken to ensure that the impact on these communities can be properly managed? (3) What is the minister doing to stop the proposed closure of a further 1 000 kilometres of line by the end of the year? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
(2) What steps has the minister taken to ensure that the impact on these communities can be properly managed? (3) What is the minister doing to stop the proposed closure of a further 1 000 kilometres of line by the end of the year? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
(3) What is the minister doing to stop the proposed closure of a further 1 000 kilometres of line by the end of the year? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN replied: (1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
(1)-(3) The member asks an interesting question, but the way in which she asks it is also quite interesting. I do not know where the figure of 1 000 kilometres comes from. Has that figure been plucked out of the air? A lot of figures have been plucked out of the air over the past — Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Hon Ken Travers : You tell us the right answer then. Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : The member should go back to Google and try to find gossip on people. This is a serious issue. Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Since about 2004, various propositions have been put about the future of the narrow-gauge grain rail network, which is about 2 300 kilometres long in its entirety. The propositions have included claims that perhaps 1 000 kilometres should be closed under some proposal or other to concentrate various routes. I have heard all sorts of other proposals, some under the banner of the Grain Infrastructure Group study, and varying lengths of rail line have been mentioned as possible candidates for closure. I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
I am familiar with the four lines that the member is talking about today. The decision on the closure of a rail line actually rests with me, but technically an operator can choose not to operate on a particular piece of line, so that becomes a little semantic. I want to keep as much of our grain freight task on rail, as opposed to road, as is possible, so I have been taking a number of actions in recent times to guarantee that. Firstly, I have been in dialogue with the relevant stakeholders. Indeed, I have had a meeting here at Parliament House in the past couple of weeks to consider an earlier proposal that had come forward from the Freight Logistics Council, which was to have a subgroup look in a strategic way at the future of grain rail. It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
It has been shown that, as economic circumstances have unfolded, including the recent deregulation of the wheat market, the scenario has constantly changed. If the promised investment of $400 million proposed by the GIG study, which never eventuated, had been made, the change in the market would have meant that that money had been misspent. That shows the changing picture. In relation to the immediate matter that the member raised, we need to make that strategic assessment, but in particular we need to quite quickly make some initial decisions that are impacted on by the announcement by WestNet Rail, the rail leaseholder, that it intended to close those four lines. Firstly, we obviously want to avoid any form of chaos on the roads, and I have said that consistently. I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
I hope I have given the member some information that is of use. What are we doing about it right now? I am continuing to talk with WestNet Rail. I have had discussions throughout today. I take this matter seriously. Officers from my ministerial office are meeting with WestNet Rail representatives, I think, at this very moment. The government is desperately keen to make sure that we find a productive way forward, and we will work in partnership with the affected parties to make sure that we do that. Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Hon Adele Farina : Are they also meeting with Main Roads? Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
Hon SIMON O’BRIEN : I mentioned the Freight Logistics Council. Implicit in any examination of the road-rail equation for grain freight in future is the involvement of Main Roads, but for now it is primarily a concern that the government has with WestNet Rail as the leaseholder.
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.