A member of parliament is seeking clarity on the contractual arrangements between Westrail and the Leighton Shores consortium regarding the Leighton marshalling yards redevelopment, alleging previous difficulties in obtaining this information. The Minister's response is evasive, stating only that there is a 'preferred tender status'.

AnsweredQoN 33Legislative Council
Asked
10 August 2000
Portfolio
Transport

QuestionView source ↗

I refer to the difficulty the Constitutional Affairs Committee had, when examining the Leighton marshalling yards redevelopment, obtaining an answer from the minister about the nature of the contractual obligation between the Leighton Shores consortium and Westrail, and the difficulty experienced by journalists from The West Australian in the same matter, and ask – (1) Will the minister now provide the House with a clear description of the nature of the arrangements between Westrail and the Leighton Shores consortium; and if not, why not? (2) Is the minister in a position to table at some early point the agreement between the Government and the proponent? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE

AnswerView source ↗

(1)-(2) I answered this question the other day and said that there was a preferred tender status with the proponent.
(1) Will the minister now provide the House with a clear description of the nature of the arrangements between Westrail and the Leighton Shores consortium; and if not, why not? (2) Is the minister in a position to table at some early point the agreement between the Government and the proponent? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (1)-(2) I answered this question the other day and said that there was a preferred tender status with the proponent.
(2) Is the minister in a position to table at some early point the agreement between the Government and the proponent? Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (1)-(2) I answered this question the other day and said that there was a preferred tender status with the proponent.
Hon M.J. CRIDDLE replied: (1)-(2) I answered this question the other day and said that there was a preferred tender status with the proponent.
(1)-(2) I answered this question the other day and said that there was a preferred tender status with the proponent.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more