Rail Electrification Project

Mr MARSHALL (Dunstan—Leader of the Opposition) (14:25): My question is to the Minister for Transport and Infrastructure. Given that the minister first knew of the problems with the cable on the Seaford line back in June 2014, why has it taken him nearly 19 months to do something about it?

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister Assisting the Minister for Planning, Minister Assisting the Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (14:25): Certainly, there has been a problem—in fact, a developing problem—with the catenary wire on the Seaford line since the first separation of the catenary wire occurred in the middle of last year. I think we last ventilated this issue in here resulting from some questions from the member for Mitchell, who has also displayed a keen interest in this. As I explained at the time, it was thought, after the first occurrence in the middle of last year, that it was an isolated incident. There was an inspection done at the time and there seemed to be a parting of the cable which seemed to be (as I was advised at the time and I think I advised the house) a result of how the cable was installed, or related to the join of the cable.

Even more concerningly, we have had a repeat of the problem, which occurred in May of this year, obviously, to the deep frustration of the government, putting it very mildly, let alone to commuters, as well as the lead contractor, a company called Laing O'Rourke. There was concern about why this had happened again and further investigations occurred.

The advice I had at that time (and I think, looking back, what I advised the house in early June this year) was it was thought that the problem could be resolved with some targeted rectification—some targeted replacement of some parts of the wire related to those areas which had failed. In the meantime, there had been works on an ongoing basis, particularly after the last service and before the commencement of the first service the next day, to make sure that the line was serviceable and safe for everyone in the corridor. There had been strengthening and bonding, and similar sorts of efforts, to make sure that anything that might have been a concern and might have impacted on the operation of that cable was attended to so the train line could operate, and operate safely.

Since that second incident in May of this year, there have been much further efforts by both the lead contractor, who is responsible to the government for the supply and installation of this wire; and, in the course of those investigations in the months following that second incident (the months we have just had preceding), I am now advised that the problem is far deeper and more extensive.

The problem is not about the installation of the wire or, indeed, just joins in the wire, which is what I was advised previously and what I advised the chamber. The issue is with the manufacture of the wire itself. The advice that I have now is that the supplier of the wire, a company called Olex Australia, supplied that wire from their manufacturing facility in Victoria for this project. They have supplied the project with a faulty batch of wire.

Despite all of the investigations and analysis by both the lead contractor, Laing O'Rourke, and also the department, it is now deemed necessary that all of that wire that has been supplied by Olex Australia needs to be replaced. That is very extensive. We are talking about some 35 kilometres of wire. It is far more extensive than what we thought when either of those two instances occurred that I described earlier.

The SPEAKER: Supplementary, the leader.