ROADS, RURAL SEALED NETWORK

99 Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (31 July 2007).

1. Why is the 2006-07 estimated result for the percentage length of rural sealed network to be rehabilitated only 0.1 per cent when the 2006-07 target was 0.4 per cent, and why has the target been reduced to 0.1 per cent in 2007-08?

2. Why is the 2006-07 Estimated Result for the percentage for the length of rural sealed network rescaled only 2,6 per cent when the 2006-07 target was 3 per cent?

The Hon. P.F. CONLON (Elder—Minister for Transport, Minister for Infrastructure, Minister for Energy): I provide the following information:

1. The 2006-07 predicted rehabilitation target of 0.4 per cent was based on the reported 2005-06 achievement of 0.4 per cent This 2005-06 reported achievement was subsequently found to be incorrect with some treatments having been incorrectly coded. The actual amount rehabilitated in 2005-06 was 0.1 per cent and this should have been the target for 2006-07. The estimated result for 2006-07 is on par with the 2005-06 actual and typical of the annual rural coverage rate.

2. The 2006-07 resealing result is slightly down on the target due to the use of some of the funds to repair the existing surface of approx 0.4 per cent of rural sealed road using restoration treatments, such as waterblasting. These treatments aim to rejuvenate the existing seal and are not recorded as a new surfacing (i.e. reseal).