❓ Question regarding unresolved compensation claims for the Southern Rail Link project and potential cost blow-outs due to underestimation and alleged uncooperative behaviour towards claimants. The Minister denies the accusations, stating extensive communication and proper management of claims.
AnsweredQoN 35Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer the minister to her statement to this House on 19 March 2003 that the Government had budgeted the cost of compensation for the acquisition of CBD buildings required for the southern rail link to be approximately $38 million, which included land value and compensation for both property owners and businesses, and ask - (1) Can the minister confirm that the majority of compensation claims, including those made by property owners, remain unresolved? (2) If so, does the minister recognise the potential for cost blow-outs across these 45 claims, which will again increase the already bloated southern rail link budget? (3) Will the minister now concede that as a result of her underestimation of compensation claims, she is being uncooperative and threatening towards claimants in an attempt to defer and delay their legitimate claims? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
(1) Can the minister confirm that the majority of compensation claims, including those made by property owners, remain unresolved? (2) If so, does the minister recognise the potential for cost blow-outs across these 45 claims, which will again increase the already bloated southern rail link budget? (3) Will the minister now concede that as a result of her underestimation of compensation claims, she is being uncooperative and threatening towards claimants in an attempt to defer and delay their legitimate claims? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
(2) If so, does the minister recognise the potential for cost blow-outs across these 45 claims, which will again increase the already bloated southern rail link budget? (3) Will the minister now concede that as a result of her underestimation of compensation claims, she is being uncooperative and threatening towards claimants in an attempt to defer and delay their legitimate claims? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
(3) Will the minister now concede that as a result of her underestimation of compensation claims, she is being uncooperative and threatening towards claimants in an attempt to defer and delay their legitimate claims? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
(1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
[See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
(1) Can the minister confirm that the majority of compensation claims, including those made by property owners, remain unresolved? (2) If so, does the minister recognise the potential for cost blow-outs across these 45 claims, which will again increase the already bloated southern rail link budget? (3) Will the minister now concede that as a result of her underestimation of compensation claims, she is being uncooperative and threatening towards claimants in an attempt to defer and delay their legitimate claims? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
(2) If so, does the minister recognise the potential for cost blow-outs across these 45 claims, which will again increase the already bloated southern rail link budget? (3) Will the minister now concede that as a result of her underestimation of compensation claims, she is being uncooperative and threatening towards claimants in an attempt to defer and delay their legitimate claims? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
(3) Will the minister now concede that as a result of her underestimation of compensation claims, she is being uncooperative and threatening towards claimants in an attempt to defer and delay their legitimate claims? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: (1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
(1)-(3) I thank the member for the question. I have been waiting all week for this. We heard on the radio that I was to be the subject of a blistering attack from the Opposition. Every day I have been getting ready for that blistering attack. Whenever there are businesses to relocate there will be a degree of trauma. We recognise that and we have done everything we can to manage this properly and to give those businesses the maximum opportunity to get their claims in. Mr M.W. Trenorden: That’s nonsense. The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
The SPEAKER: Order! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Mr Speaker, in response to that I will table a series of documents with the time lines for each tenancy, which have been subject to some media comment of recent time, detailing exactly the meetings that have been held and the letters that have been sent. These documents show there has been very extensive communication with all the tenancies. Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Mr P.G. Pendal: Absolute rubbish! The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Going back to 19 May 2003, we contacted all the tenants. There had been informal contact before then, but the formal contact started on 19 May 2003. Throughout that time the whole process was explained to them, what the various steps would be, what the compensation claims - Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
The SPEAKER: Order, members! Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: And what the compensation procedures would be. In September they were formally asked to produce - The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
The SPEAKER: I call the member for Nedlands to order for the second time. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In September when the formal notice was given the tenants were again formally advised that they needed to lodge their compensation claims. A number of those claims were dealt with and completed before Christmas last year. When a number of tenants had not issued their claims in December, the Western Australian Planning Commission wrote and told them that they must understand that if their compensation claims were to be processed before 4 March, which was when they were required to vacate the premises, they would have to be lodged by 9 January, otherwise the department may not be in a position to make a payment before they needed to move. Some of the tenants decided not to do that. The Korean family, the Shims, originally told us their claim would be lodged in September, they then said they would be out by January, but they ultimately decided to defer it until February to get their last six months trading figures in because they thought that would enhance their claim. They took that commercial decision on the full understanding that it might make it difficult for them to receive a compensation payment. Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Mr C.J. Barnett: Have you met them? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I have spoken to their representatives. We have resolved the claim with the Shims by way of an interim payment, and we will then have time to fully assess the remainder of their claim. There has never been any suggestion by LandCorp that they did not have a claim. Mr Ezcaray was another gentleman who got a lot of publicity. Of course he has not been paid any compensation, because he has not made a claim. He has been asked again and again. I do not know whether members of the Opposition and Paul Armstrong from The West Australian believe we should just park a truck full of money outside, let them take as much as they like and when they think they have got enough, drive the truck away. We do not do business like that. There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
There are two factors. Firstly, all those business owners who are required to relocate are unhappy about it. We understand that. Secondly, there is always an expectation that when the Government is involved, the Government has very deep pockets and the claims will be very large. I indicate to the member for Carine that one of the last six major claims in respect of the Northbridge tunnel, which was opened in 1998-99, has only just been resolved in the courts. Of course there will be a lot of expectations. In relation to this claim, Main Roads was successful and the inflated expectations of the landowners were not supported by the courts. I am pleased to say that the Government has resolved all the issues in William Street so that it can take occupation and give Leighton Constructions vacant possession. There will be ongoing discussions. I have no doubt that some of the landowners will ultimately take these matters to the courts, but that is the way of the world. I will table these documents, and I will have a few more to be tabled. [See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
[See papers Nos 2151 to 2153.] Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Mr P.D. Omodei: Is that the answer: that is the way of the world? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: In relation to the landowner, it is.
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.