❓ Question regarding the impact of new 20-25 year contracts for school bus contractors on their capital investment, referencing concerns raised by the member for Bunbury. The Minister defends the decision, highlighting the previous government's inadequate contracts and the benefits of the new system.
AnsweredQoN 881Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
In light of the Cabinet’s decision to rob school bus contractors of their capital investment by introducing a system of 20 to 25-year contracts, I ask: did the minister or the Cabinet consider the opinion of the member for Bunbury? The member is quoted in a press release dated 19 February 2002 as saying - Operators providing school bus services have often invested their life savings to gain these contracts and . . . these contracts could become worthless. Mr D’Orazio interjected. Mr TRENORDEN: They are not my words but the words of a government backbencher - Without due consideration, some operators could face financial ruin. The member for Bunbury said that in a press release. They are not my words - The Government must either leave the existing system in place or buy-out current operators . . . Withdrawal of Remark The SPEAKER: The imputation in the question is inappropriate. I ask the member to withdraw the part of the question that related to robbery. Mr TRENORDEN: I did not use the word “robbery”. The SPEAKER: I do not wish to debate it. I ask the member withdraw that part of the question. Mr TRENORDEN: For the purposes of the Hansard , I will say “deprived”. The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS
AnswerView source ↗
I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
Mr TRENORDEN: They are not my words but the words of a government backbencher - Without due consideration, some operators could face financial ruin. The member for Bunbury said that in a press release. They are not my words - The Government must either leave the existing system in place or buy-out current operators . . . Withdrawal of Remark The SPEAKER: The imputation in the question is inappropriate. I ask the member to withdraw the part of the question that related to robbery. Mr TRENORDEN: I did not use the word “robbery”. The SPEAKER: I do not wish to debate it. I ask the member withdraw that part of the question. Mr TRENORDEN: For the purposes of the Hansard , I will say “deprived”. The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS replied: I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
Mr TRENORDEN: I did not use the word “robbery”. The SPEAKER: I do not wish to debate it. I ask the member withdraw that part of the question. Mr TRENORDEN: For the purposes of the Hansard , I will say “deprived”. The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS replied: I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
The SPEAKER: I do not wish to debate it. I ask the member withdraw that part of the question. Mr TRENORDEN: For the purposes of the Hansard , I will say “deprived”. The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS replied: I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
Mr TRENORDEN: For the purposes of the Hansard , I will say “deprived”. The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS replied: I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS replied: I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
Mr TRENORDEN: They are not my words but the words of a government backbencher - Without due consideration, some operators could face financial ruin. The member for Bunbury said that in a press release. They are not my words - The Government must either leave the existing system in place or buy-out current operators . . . Withdrawal of Remark The SPEAKER: The imputation in the question is inappropriate. I ask the member to withdraw the part of the question that related to robbery. Mr TRENORDEN: I did not use the word “robbery”. The SPEAKER: I do not wish to debate it. I ask the member withdraw that part of the question. Mr TRENORDEN: For the purposes of the Hansard , I will say “deprived”. The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS replied: I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
Mr TRENORDEN: I did not use the word “robbery”. The SPEAKER: I do not wish to debate it. I ask the member withdraw that part of the question. Mr TRENORDEN: For the purposes of the Hansard , I will say “deprived”. The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS replied: I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
The SPEAKER: I do not wish to debate it. I ask the member withdraw that part of the question. Mr TRENORDEN: For the purposes of the Hansard , I will say “deprived”. The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS replied: I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
Mr TRENORDEN: For the purposes of the Hansard , I will say “deprived”. The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS replied: I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
The SPEAKER: That is withdrawn. Questions without Notice Resumed Mrs ROBERTS replied: I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
I am amazed at the gall of the Leader of the National Party in asking this question. As I have told the House time and again, it was the National Party that left bus contractors high and dry over the past eight years. It provided bus operators with contracts that could be terminated on a month’s notice. That is the legal advice that I received from the Crown Solicitor. Any of those contracts could be terminated at a month’s notice. All the previous Government gave bus operators was a letter of intent that the Crown Solicitor said was not worth the paper on which it was written. The previous Government did not even give that letter to the bus contractors; it gave it to the predecessor of Transport Forum WA. The Crown Solicitor also said that there is no such thing as contracts in perpetuity. Further, the State Supply Commission has said that it never ticked off on that process and that it is contrary to State Supply Commission guidelines. Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
Ms Hodson-Thomas: You are working outside the guidelines now. Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
Mrs ROBERTS: The member for Carine should congratulate our Government on its decision. I have worked hand in hand with the State Supply Commission and the Crown Solicitor’s Office, and I have come up with a solution that has been applauded by many bus operators. I have received beautiful cards and letters from people who attended the public meeting thanking me and saying that they at last have some certainty. None of those bus operators is thanking anyone from the National Party, because the National Party sat on its hands and did nothing for its constituent members. It is the Labor Party that has, for the first time, provided bus contractors with some real certainty. We will provide them with contracts of up to 20 and 25 years. When those contracts go out to tender at the end of that period, preference will be given to local companies. The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
The member for Bunbury is one of this House’s best representatives of his constituency. I took note of the very sensible points he made. We acknowledge, as the member for Bunbury suggested, that people have made a significant investment in these bus contracts and that they should not have to suffer under the current system in which their contracts can be terminated at a month’s notice. That is why we have given them the security of 20 or 25-year contracts.
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.