HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-06-17 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

ROYAL ADELAIDE HOSPITAL

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (15:04): Has the Minister for Health received a report from Coffey Environments Pty Ltd on the level of contamination at the rail yard site and, if so, will he table it, and does he have a revised cost estimate of the remediation of the site prior to the government proposed central hospital?

Members interjecting:

Ms CHAPMAN: Listen up; you listen. When asked about the cost of remediation on 28 February last year, the minister stated:

The figure of $40 million sticks in my mind but, rather than be attached to that, I will get a response back to the member.

I have not had a response to that. Today the minister claimed that his estimate was less and that he was confident that it would be under that. He has not yet identified what it is. The estimated cost for site and soil remediation of the now abandoned Tasmanian rail yard hospital proposal was $42 million for a rail yard half the size that exists in Adelaide.

The SPEAKER: Order! The deputy leader has sat down, so the cameraman in the gallery can now stop taking photographs of her.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Order! The Minister for Health has the call.

The Hon. J.D. HILL (Kaurna—Minister for Health, Minister for the Southern Suburbs, Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts) (15:05): The deputy leader asked me about a particular report. I am not sure about the status of that report—

Ms Chapman interjecting:

The Hon. J.D. HILL: I said that I am not aware of the status of that report, but I am happy to get advice in relation to it. The deputy leader asked about remediation. I thought I answered that. It is an absolute maximum of $40 million, but I expect it to be well below that—that is the advice I have. I am advised not to provide the exact figure because it might affect whatever negotiations need to take place in order to have it done. I will look at the honourable member's question. It was a long question. If there is further information I can provide, I will provide it.

Can I say that because remediation costs so much on another site in another state it should cost the same or more in this state because the site is bigger is farcical. One would have to take into account what happened on the site, the nature of the land, its proximity to other materials and industries—a whole range of things. I do not see the relevance of that comment. It is just a foolish thing to say.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT