HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2008-10-30 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

PENOLA BYPASS

The Hon. M. PARNELL (15:00): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Urban Development and Planning, representing the Minister for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure, a question about the Penola bypass.

Leave granted.

The Hon. M. PARNELL: There have been plans for many years for a road bypass to take trucks off the main street of the picturesque town of Penola in the state's South-East. Back in November 2006, a DTEI submission to the Public Works Committee suggested that the state's contribution to the $15 million Penola bypass project would be $4 million, subject to the Wattle Range Council's successful application for federal funding. These figures, including the state's contribution of $4 million, were confirmed recently on 9 September this year by the CEO of Wattle Range Council, Mr Frank Brennan, on ABC local radio.

However, in a letter dated 8 September—the day before that radio interview—Trudi Meakins, executive director of DTEI, wrote to Frank Brennan, stating:

I am pleased to advise that $8.85 million has been committed to the Penola bypass under the Long Life Roads Program for expenditure in 2008-09...I understand that the Wattle Range Council has also made a $2 million allocation towards this project and is progressing with land acquisition of the proposed bypass corridor.

The letter continues:

As the project estimate for the whole bypass at this stage exceeds the available combined budgets of DTEI and Wattle Range Council, I encourage your council to continue to lobby the Australian Government for funding to complete the whole project. Until additional funding is provided, I believe the best way forward is to apply the State Government's funding of $8.85 million towards construction of the southern section of the bypass only.

According to this letter, the state's contribution has more than doubled from what was previously publicly revealed, from $4 million to $8.85 million, and it has gone from being contingent on matching federal funds to being untied. The other significant change is the reference to the state funding being directed to the southern section only of the bypass. I point out to members that the southern section will not reduce the number of any trucks that currently pass through Penola. It is purely designed for new additional trucks harvesting blue gums.

Trucks that currently travel between Mount Gambier and Adelaide will still need to pass through the heart of Penola. In the meantime, and without any further notification of federal funding, the council has commenced compulsory acquisition of the land for the bypass, a process which has been highly distressing for the residents affected. My questions of the minister are:

1. What is the state government's actual funding contribution to this project?

2. Will the state's contribution continue to be contingent on matching federal funding or does the state government intend to fund the majority of the project on its own?

3. What is the point of the state government funding a road bypass that will not remove one additional truck from the heart of Penola?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (15:03): I will refer that question to my colleague in another place to get the details, but I will just make the comment that this government is very mindful of the need to protect communities, particularly in our regional areas, and I think that, whatever the figure is, this government is very generous to rural communities in terms of the provision of key infrastructure.

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