HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2012-04-05 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

PUBLIC TRANSPORT, NORTH-EASTERN SUBURBS

Mr GARDNER (Morialta) (12:19): I move:

That this house calls upon the government to review and improve public transport services to the north-eastern suburbs, with particular reference to the demand for direct services to the city and the range of problems connected with the Paradise Interchange.

As the Minister of Transport Services said in this place on Tuesday, 'Much has been said about public transport over the last few weeks and months.' I believe when people talk about public transport that there might be two reasons: either public transport is working so well that we are the envy of every other state and nation around the world; or, alternatively, it is failing miserably. Unfortunately in South Australia what is happening indicates that the latter is the case.

I was disappointed to hear the minister's statement on Tuesday implying that the reason for their failures in offering an efficient service was partly due to the fact that 100,000 passengers use the system every weekday and that the government cannot force cars off the road to reduce congestion or stop upgrading water infrastructure. It is a poor excuse; it is nothing short of the spin that we have come to expect from this government, and it treats the passengers and commuters on public transport with disrespect. They know better.

Many would remember the first days after the new contracts were put in place. The late buses and the unrealistic timetables at that time were simply referred to as teething problems. On 10 October 2011, Caroline Winter from the ABC reported that an anonymous worker in the industry stated, 'There's just not enough time put into that for them to realistically make the next trip on time.' On 27 October, the Minister for Transport Services stated that, by keeping the attention on Transfield and working with Transfield, we can get some really good outcomes for people. We have since learned that it is in fact the government and not the service providers that is responsible for timetables—although that obviously came as news to at least one government minister who had responsibility for this in the past—and yet the government tried desperately to keep the attention on Transfield last year and shirk their responsibility to provide Adelaide with adequate public transport and appropriately timed timetables.

In Morialta and around the north-eastern suburbs more generally, passengers have suffered significantly. Services that used to take passengers from Athelstone, Newton and Paradise straight onto the O-Bahn busway via Paradise Interchange and into the city have become a thing of the past. Instead, passengers are required to alight at Paradise Interchange and change buses. Those wishing to go further, perhaps to the airport, must alight again in the city. I note that previously there was a bus that took people from Athelstone to the airport; now the same commuter must catch three buses.

Despite services such as the 521 and the 578 being replaced with services that do not travel directly into the city, we have also had services like the 579, which goes from Athelstone to Paradise Interchange in the morning and then reverses in the afternoon. We are duplicating the expressway in the south at the moment, but in the east the government is making assumptions that everyone wants to go in the same direction at the same time of day. As this is the only service available along Gorge Road, I feel for some of my more elderly constituents who reside, for example, at the Fifth Creek Rise Retirement Eco-village and who simply cannot get into town in the afternoon unless they walk half a kilometre uphill to reach another bus line.

I would like to thank a constituent of mine, Mrs Margaret May, who collected 168 signatures for a petition calling for this service to be reviewed. Unfortunately, due to the prescriptive requirements of petitions in this place, I have been unable to lodge that petition formally in the parliament, but I did have the opportunity to pass that petition and those signatures on to the Minister for Transport Services last year. I thank Mrs May for going to the effort of collecting those signatures and highlighting the need for an improved service, and I thank the Minister for Transport Services for accepting them. We look forward to there being some sort of response that will improve that particular service for constituents living near Gorge Road.

While I do not want to spend the entire time I have allocated here speaking on specific examples of individual public transport services, there are myriad problems to point to. In January, I was contacted by an officer of public transport services advising that C1 services were to be halved. What struck me the most was that, at a time when my office was receiving email after email of complaints from public transport passengers about crowded buses, long waits and inadequate services, I was being told by a public servant that 'feedback from the public confirms that some of these are poorly patronised in the peak periods'.

We are conducting FOIs on that and, at this stage, I have seen no evidence that there is any realistic feedback from the public. We are getting plenty of feedback in my office, I can tell you. As recently as Monday, my office was provided with another anecdotal piece of evidence from passengers complaining about the mid-morning H31 service in my suburb of Rostrevor. I should note that my wife uses that service every morning, and I am happy to inform the Minister for Transport Services that the 7.40am service is a good one, runs well and rarely is late. Please do not touch that service when you are doing the timetable for 1 July, otherwise home life for the Gardner's will get very difficult in the morning. However, I regret to inform the minister—

An honourable member interjecting:

Mr GARDNER: I'm in big trouble if that gets changed now. I regret to inform the minister, however, that by mid-morning the service is running regularly—around 20 minutes late. Last week one of my constituents challenged the bus driver on the issue, only to be told that that particular service, that he likes to catch, was 'a low priority and when things get busy the service doesn't stand a chance.'

These are just a few examples of some of the problems facing passengers in the north-eastern suburbs. The changes made by the government have provided a disjointed service which takes more time to travel if—and I must say 'if' with some hesitation—the bus arrives on time.

The manner in which the government, the Minister for Transport, as he still is, drew up the contracts, with Adelaide's metropolitan area haphazardly split up between the different contractors, has meant that thousands of extra commuters are now having to catch multiple services even to make a 10 kilometre trip from the north-eastern suburbs—suburbs like Paradise, Athelstone and Newton—into town.

At a time when buses are increasingly running late—according to the traffic, says the minister—thousands more people are now trying to catch connecting buses at places like Paradise Interchange, and in many cases missing them because their bus has run late. You see what is happening as a logical result here. Government mismanagement of the timetables because of the traffic means that more people are driving, which adds to the traffic, which, I assume, the government will then use as the excuse for why their timetables are out.

With all of these issues with connecting buses, some passengers may be tempted to drive to the Paradise Interchange and avoid the multiple bus trips. That would be the case, potentially, if anyone could find a car park.

I have with me a petition, which I will lodge with the Clerk, signed by 1,088 commuters who use the Paradise Interchange, calling on the state government to upgrade the car parking facilities at the interchange. These are the people who use the service day in and day out and who all have concerns over the accessibility of the Paradise Interchange. The O-Bahn, which is serviced from the Paradise Interchange, is a fantastic piece of infrastructure. It was, of course, a Liberal project, a Liberal piece of infrastructure, which came from the Tonkin government in the early 1980s. It was completed by someone else, but it was a Tonkin project.

It is a shame to see that this government would turn its back on improvements by failing to commit to any upgrade of Paradise Interchange in last year's budget. Funding was made available to improve the interchanges—this is a specific infrastructure project the government has pointed to on a number of occasions—but Paradise was inexplicably and specifically excluded.

We have FOI'd the submissions to the budget process from last year, and we are aware that there was a plan put in place, that there was a plan put forward by Transport to the budget process. They even had plans drawn up and, yet, it was specifically excluded from the upgrades to the interchanges.

I regret to inform the house that the car park at Paradise is full well before 8am every day, and that is a severe turn-off for commuters contemplating public transport as an option. If they want to get traffic off the road, then maybe they should be encouraging more people into public transport, but that does not seem to be the case. Last year, to explain this remarkable exclusion from the interchange upgrade project, the East Torrens Messenger in June recorded, and I am quoting Brittany Dupree's story:

...a Transport Department spokesman said parking demand at Paradise was 700 spaces per day and about 875 car parks were provided.

That has been the government's consistent position. Apparently, there are 875 car parks at Paradise and only 700 are used. The 700 figure sounds right, but I have always been a bit curious about this 875 figure. It did not make sense to me, having been out to Paradise regularly, often catching buses there. Certainly, there are not 700 cars fitting into that car park; there are, in fact, about 400 car parks at Paradise.

What the transport department spokesman and the government generally never admit is that out of these 875 parks that are apparently available—and the member for Torrens should know this—more than 400 are half a kilometre away at the Paradise Community Church. More than 400 of them are half a kilometre away in the car park at the Paradise Community Church. It is on the other side of a six-lane road, and there are no pedestrian crossing traffic lights, so that people can safely get across that. There is a pedestrian refuge in the middle of Darley Road, a six-lane road that has a pedestrian refuge where half of the communities of the Paradise Interchange, who drive there, are apparently supposed to feel safe about. Apparently, that is what they are supposed to feel good about, a pedestrian refuge.

Members of the public, in fact, could be forgiven for not realising that they are even supposed to be provided for communities in the Paradise Interchange. Those 400 car parks that the department and the minister rely on to get to this figure of 875 are inside the gates of the Paradise Community Church. They would not even know that they are there for the interchange. There is a sign on the fence at the Paradise Community Church saying Park'n'Ride, and that is terrific, but you would not know that it is for the interchange because it is half a kilometre away. It is a remarkable situation.

There is a DPTI car park with about 400 spaces which is often full by 7.30am, and the department has admitted that there are at least another 300 cars on top of that number every day. The government's response has been to lease the car parks from the Paradise Community Church—half a kilometre south on the other side of the busy six-lane road with no lights and just a pedestrian refuge.

It is worth noting that most of the commuters who miss out on a park inside the interchange do not make it as far as the church car park. Instead, by 8.30am, the field opposite the interchange next to the skate park (the member for Torrens would be aware of the skate park), which is a bit closer than the church, is full of commuters' cars. How ridiculous!

In the winter, the situation is boggy, it is a long walk, there is minimal lighting, there are no security cameras and there is minimal security. My office regularly gets complaints from people who are concerned about the security at Paradise. Anybody who cannot get a park within the DPTI car park has: firstly, the issues with the road; secondly, issues with security and their own personal safety; and, thirdly, if they are in the field on a wet day, the chances are their shoes are going to get wrecked as well, and that is unfortunate for them.

This motion asks that the government considers the effects of their recent decisions in regard to public transport in the north-eastern suburbs. It is worded in a helpful way. It is worded in a way that does not condemn or suggest that politics is above achieving outcomes in this situation. I genuinely hope that the government listens in that good faith and good spirit.

We ask that the government consider the effects of their recent decisions in regard to public transport in the north-eastern suburbs. The Minister for Transport and the Minister for Transport Services must be accountable for their decisions. When the Minister for Transport Services took on this responsibility, she said that increasing public transport patronage was a core focus for the state government. Ten years in, I look forward to seeing some evidence of that.

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg) (12:32): I support the motion that has been presented by the member for Morialta and thank him for raising this issue. The infrastructure by way of the O-Bahn service from Walkerville out to the north-eastern suburbs is certainly impressive. We have the Hon. Dean Brown, former premier and former transport minister under the Tonkin government, to thank for his vision for developing that opportunity. That was back in the days when we had doers in residence rather than thinkers in residence. As minister, he had been overseas and identified that this was an important transport option, and he developed it for South Australia.

This government has, as has been acknowledged by the member for Morialta, undertaken some improvement to the car park facilities at Tea Tree Gully and also Klemzig, and that has been important; but, to make this a service which is able to accommodate the increasing number of people in those districts who not only want to but also continue to rely on that public transport service, the Paradise Interchange must be improved.

There is no question that the member for Morialta has been dynamic in his attention to the deficiencies of that interchange and pressed the government—and, again, here today has asked the government—to review a number of transport services, including the deficiencies in that facility. He is the local member, who is active on this issue. In fact, he is so active, that he reminded me that he asked me to go out and look at the Paradise Interchange area as the new shadow minister for transport. He reminded me of Superman—a man descending in blue tights with red underpants—to hunt down and deal with this important transport issue.

Certainly, the issue is not only the difficulty with car parking for people who are ready, willing and able to use this service, but the very minimal service availability for security for cycles. Again, we are encouraging people to cycle and then travel to the city—to be able to come to and from work primarily but also for other personal attendances. He has been dynamic in this regard. Contrast that, I have to say, with the complete and utter silence from the other district that is serviced by this area, namely, the member for Hartley—

Mr Gardner interjecting:

Ms CHAPMAN: I do not know that I have heard from the member for Torrens, but I do not criticise her because I think that she is generally fairly active on public transport matters, and I give her credit for that.

Mrs Geraghty interjecting:

Ms CHAPMAN: In her whole 18 years, and I am happy to acknowledge that. I am not sure that, in the last 10 years, it has actually fallen on receptive ears—I think they almost deaf ears—but I give her credit for trying.

An honourable member interjecting:

Ms CHAPMAN: I am giving her a big tick. What I am saying about the member for Hartley is that people who are in that area contact me about this issue as the shadow minister for transport, again, asking for some representation. It seems to fall on the deaf ears of the government, but their own local member, of course, is a member of that cabinet who it seems to me is in a position of some influence.

She sits on the same bench with the Minister for Transport Services. You would think they would have some influence, but, of course, the question of how much influence the Minister for Transport Services has within her own hierarchy is another matter. I simply raise the point that it is necessary for this service and others in this north-east region to be improved and that we should be singing from the same hymn sheet.

In this instance we are asking the Minister for Education, namely as the member for Hartley, to at least join the choir and not sit in silence on this issue so that we can ensure that we have this extra service. The other question of concern that has been raised is the whole connectivity of bus services to the north-east region. Just this week I had a senior journalist raise with me the problem for people living in that area to be able to go to the football at West Lakes. There used to be a direct, dedicated service. Now, of course, you have to actually catch other buses—sometimes three—to be able just to get to a previous service.

That is not an isolated occasion. I have had a number of complaints from people who say that they want to get to airports and various other facilities that used to have one service that now have two or three services to replace it, but because the timetabling has been such a bungled arrangement where the connectivity is clearly not there, people are having to catch very, very early bus services to then wait significant times to continue on their journey.

So when the government redid the contracts last year and it redid the timetabling and the performance indicators and the requirements to provide for these efficient services, including the major issue of connectivity (not just the reliability of course of buses turning up on time, or at all, etc.), clearly a disastrous circumstance has transpired from the timetabling that has been set.

We have had excuses from the minister in this house about her attempting to speak to the bus contractors. She is writing them letters. She is insisting on written undertakings, and all sorts of things. She has given them some pathetic penalties, and so on. However, the bottom line is that she has acknowledged here this week in the parliament herself that the timetabling is in error and needs to be fixed. The tragedy is that yesterday she told us that she is not going to do anything about it until 1 July—not before, not after, 1 July. That is her position.

We need to have some assurance by the minister. Having acknowledged that the whole thing is a mess, we need to have some assurance that she will do something about it. If there is some legal impediment in these contracts that does not allow her to do it, then we need to know what the cost penalty is to the government for it to change these timetables and to change these performance indicators within the six-month period? We must know that. We as taxpayers are entitled to know that, and the consumers and users of these bus services need to have some understanding of that.

It may be that the poor, old taxpayer has to end up paying again for the bungle of the government, but whatever it is we need to know about it. We need her to come clean and we need to be able to remedy this before July because we cannot expect the people in the north-east region, and indeed across the metropolitan area, to be left with three more months of pain and a public bus service which is just totally inadequate and which is really causing the thousands and thousands of complaints that are being reported on this issue. So, it is time to fix it.

I heard the minister being described as the 'two-stroke model' on the radio this morning. I am not quite sure what that means, but it seems to suggest that she is not up to the job. I am again asking the minister to remedy this situation before we get to Easter and, if she does not, to hand over control to someone who knows what they are doing.

Ms BEDFORD (Florey) (12:40): It is my privilege to put some perspective back into this motion, and to place on record some information I have been able to get about the north-eastern bus services. The Adelaide O-Bahn corridor is the primary public transport corridor servicing the north-eastern suburbs. On 2 October 2011, with the commencement of new service contracts, Transfield Services (operating as Light City Buses) was introduced as the new provider of the bus services for the outer north-east area, which contains the O-Bahn corridor.

From that date, because service contracts provide exclusive rights, several bus routes, including: J1C1, J2C2, 521, 530 and 570, which previously operated seamlessly, now have two service providers. As a consequence, people have been required to transfer between Light City and Torrens Transit services in the city (the J and C services), or at either Paradise for the 530 and 578 services, or Klemzig for the 521 service. If commuters do not wish to transfer at Paradise or Klemzig for a Light City O-Bahn service, they are able to travel directly to the city via the road network on a Torrens Transit service.

The O-Bahn provides the most frequent services, and thus many opportunities to transfer to any bus corridor in the metropolitan area. In the morning peak period between 7am and 9am, there are 70 scheduled services available directly to the city from Tea Tree Plaza—that is one every minute and 45 seconds. From the Paradise interchange to the city, there are 88 scheduled service—one every minute and 22 seconds, and from Klemzig there are 66 scheduled services directly to the city—one every minute and 50 seconds. Passenger statistics for March 2012 suggest there is sufficient O-Bahn system capacity.

The current number of services for the 7am to 9am peak periods provide seated capacity for between 5,500 and 9,000 passengers per day, depending on vehicle type, and an overall capacity, seated and standing, for between 9,700 and 13,900 per day, again depending on vehicle type. Given the total boardings for March 2012 for the 7am to 9am peak period travelling towards the city has averaged 7,100 per day, the system is operating at between 50 and 80 per cent of available capacity.

While it is acknowledged that some services may be full and therefore unable to pick up all passengers, the following service is only a matter of a minute or two behind. The frequency of service is able to clear queues very quickly. The demand for direct service to the city from the north-eastern suburbs is being well met by the combination of O-Bahn and road network buses. There are plans to upgrade the interchanges along the O-Bahn corridor. In the 2011-12 budget measures statement, the government announced $17.1 million would be provided over two financial years to upgrade the interchanges. The upgrades will include:

increased park-and-ride facilities;

improved boarding facilities; and

improved passenger amenities and safety by providing covered shelter and seating, security cameras and lighting, and provide more accessible walking and cycling paths.

Since the announcement, the department has sought expressions if interest for innovate private sector proposals to develop the Klemzig interchange. The department has also sought, through a public tender, concept design of Paradise and Tea Tree Plaza interchanges to cater for an increased demand for passenger and parking facilities. The requirements of the concept are to:

improve passenger loading times;

improve accessibility, passenger information, safety, security, shelter, seating and amenity;

improve efficiency and safety of bus operations within the interchange;

provide for increased frequency, speed and reliability into and out of the interchanges;

provide for improved connectivity of bus services between the interchanges and regional and district centres;

improve access to and exits from the interchanges to the adjacent road network; and

improve commuter bicycle and car parking capacity.

The department is also currently planning for the construction of an additional multi-deck car park at Tea Tree Plaza which will provide 300 additional commuter car parking spaces adjacent to the interchange. I, along with the members for Wright and Newland, and on behalf of the people of Florey, have been involved in ongoing discussions with the ministers to work on parking solutions, and will be providing the opportunity for people to attend a public forum in the area very soon.

I would also like to place on record some comments about Paradise Interchange. The concept design requirements for Paradise Interchange reflect its importance as a transfer point from the road network to the O-Bahn. Included is the requirement to show how the current 475-space car park could be expanded to 950 to 1,000 spaces, as well as identifying how car parking capacity can be further increased. It should be noted that the current 475 spaces in the car park are being supplemented by leasing an additional 400 spaces from the nearby Paradise Community Church. So, along with members on this side, I assure you all that we are working very hard to improve the already very popular O-Bahn system.

Mr GRIFFITHS (Goyder) (12:45): I rise in support of the motion of the member for Morialta. It is fantastic that the debate has occurred because the information that the member for Florey has put on the record is very handy for all South Australians to be aware of, especially when it comes to the scoping work being done for the increase to car park spaces at Paradise.

In a former role within the opposition, I visited Paradise on four mornings and spoke to the people there, not only about the car parking but also the bus issues. Connection buses are now required and, if there are slight time delays, it creates complications in getting people to where they want. I note that the member for Morialta's motion is not inflammatory, not designed to make things difficult. It is only designed to ensure that the government, and the minister in particular, take responsibility for ensuring that there is a review to improve public transport because they are the sorts of comments that were coming through to me at that time, and I know they are the sorts of comments that are coming through to the member for Morialta on a continuing basis as a local MP from his constituents who want to use public transport but want it to work as best as it possibly can for them. That is the same for all of us here.

The public transport contract is $1.6 billion over 12 years. It is designed to ensure that a mature service, one that has existed for many years—and it has been in private operators' hands for something like 15 years—operates as best it can, serving the need of the people. Yes, the new operators have had a lot of concerns. Yes, the minister has put some fines in place for the period from 1 October to the end of December. I am sure that when the minister reviews the data on the delays or the late buses or the buses that do not do pick ups for the first quarter of this calendar year, there will be some more fines in place if we can base it on the calls that are coming through to talkback radio.

This motion just calls upon the government to review and improve as quickly as it can north-eastern suburbs transport options. The minister has commented in this chamber that she hopes to have a review undertaken and completed and a new time schedule in place by 1 July 2012. All we want on this side is for it to be hurried up as much as possible and for the minister to put pressure upon her staff and the contractors to ensure that the best changes are made as quickly as possible to reflect what the real travel times are so that the time frames are realistic and recognise the level of congestion that occurs in the traffic and take into account the construction activity that is taking place to do with the variety of infrastructure projects that are occurring in the area, but it gets them so that they are accurate and it gets people where they need to be.

I have had the horror stories come to me of people who have been threatened with the loss of their job, about the transport difficulties of getting kids to school and that sort of thing. It is a system that should be much better than it is. The member for Morialta has been deliberately very careful in the wording of this motion to get a positive outcome. It is not just a slap for the government; this is one that is focused on getting some benefits for people. That is what the parliament should talk about more often. The member for Torrens looks at me with a smile on her face.

Mr Gardner: She's friendly.

Mr GRIFFITHS: She is friendly. I am trying to reflect on this in a positive way. It is good that the member for—

The Hon. M.J. Wright: You'd make a good shadow minister.

Mr GRIFFITHS: We'll see. The member for Florey put some really good information on the record which I was not aware of before. The member for Morialta was very interested in it and, no doubt, the member for Bragg will be very interested in it also. Let's hope that there is some support within the chamber for the motion and, importantly, that there is some support for the minister to do her job as best as she can as quickly as she can so that South Australians benefit from it.

Mr GARDNER (Morialta) (12:49): It is a red-letter day for private members' motions. We have had a motion moved and a petition of 1,088 signatures presented to the clerk not 20 minutes ago seeking that we have a proper car parking facility at Paradise Interchange, and the member for Florey announced that we are going to have one, so it is great news. It is fantastic news and I commend the government for picking up on this very important issue that was inexplicably excluded from the budget last year when we had money put aside for the interchanges at Klemzig and Tea Tree Gully, but specifically not Paradise.

This is something that I have written upwards of a dozen letters to various government ministers about, particularly the Minister for Transport and, over the last few months, the Minister for Transport Services. None of them took the time to say that it was on the cards then, so I commend the member for Florey for her excellent contribution in which she has announced this new government funding for a 900 to 1,000-space car park facility at Paradise.

We look forward to holding the government to account and seeing it built so that commuters from the north-eastern suburbs will have the opportunity to utilise that facility over the years ahead. It is excellent news and we are very excited, and we look forward to sharing that news with all of the constituents in Morialta and Hartley. They finally listened! They finally listened and we are very glad for it. However, that said, the motion is still valuable. Let me read the motion again:

That this house calls upon the government to review and improve public transport services to the north-eastern suburbs, with particular reference to the demand for direct services to the city, and the range of problems connected with the Paradise Interchange.

There has been a range of problems; parking was the biggest and most important of them, and we have fixed that, so that is excellent news. Since the motion began half an hour ago that has been solved; now let's talk about the toilets, now let's talk about the security, now let's talk about the direct bus services from suburbs 10 kilometres from the city centre into the city itself.

I call upon every member in this house to vote for this motion that calls upon this house to call upon the government to review and improve public transport services to the north-eastern suburbs with particular reference to the demand for direct services to the city and the range of problems connected with the Paradise Interchange. Thank you to the member for Bragg, the member for Florey and the member for Goyder for their contributions. I commend the motion.

The house divided on the motion:

AYES (17)
Brock, G.G. Chapman, V.A. Evans, I.F.
Gardner, J.A.W. (teller) Goldsworthy, M.R. Griffiths, S.P.
Hamilton-Smith, M.L.J. Marshall, S.S. McFetridge, D.
Pederick, A.S. Pisoni, D.G. Sanderson, R.
Such, R.B. van Holst Pellekaan, D.C. Venning, I.H.
Whetstone, T.J. Williams, M.R.
NOES (22)
Atkinson, M.J. Bedford, F.E. (teller) Bettison. Z.L.
Bignell, L.W. Caica, P. Close, S.E.
Conlon, P.F. Geraghty, R.K. Hill, J.D.
Kenyon, T.R. Key, S.W. Koutsantonis, A.
O'Brien, M.F. Odenwalder, L.K. Piccolo, T.
Rankine, J.M. Rau, J.R. Sibbons, A.L.
Snelling, J.J. Thompson, M.G. Weatherill, J.W.
Wright, M.J.
PAIRS (4)
Redmond, I.M. Portolesi, G.
Pengilly, M. Vlahos, L.A.

Majority of 5 for the noes.

Motion thus negatived.


[Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00]


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