STANDING COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES AND FINANCIAL OPERATIONS

PUBLIC TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

TRANSCRIPT OF EVIDENCE TAKEN AT TUESDAY, 9 DECEMBER 2008

Members

Hon Giz Watson (Chairperson) Hon Ken Travers (Deputy Chairman) Hon Brian Ellis Hon Sheila Mills Hon Helen Morton ______Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 1

Hearing commenced at 9.07 am

BURGESS, MR MARK Executive Director System, Regional Town and School Bus Services, , West Parade, East Perth 6004, sworn and examined:

WALDOCK, MR REECE Chief Executive Officer, Public Transport Authority, Public Transport Centre, West Parade, East Perth 6004, sworn and examined:

KING, MR PETER Executive Director Finance and Contracts, Public Transport Authority, Public Transport Centre, West Parade, East Perth 6004, sworn and examined:

The CHAIRPERSON: On behalf of the committee, I would like to welcome you, gentlemen, this morning to the meeting. Before we begin, I am required to ask you to take either an oath or an affirmation. [Witnesses took the affirmation.] The CHAIRPERSON: You will have signed a document entitled “Information for Witnesses”. Have you read and understood that document? The Witnesses: Yes. The CHAIRPERSON: These proceedings are being recorded by Hansard, and a transcript of your evidence will be provided to you. To assist the committee and Hansard, could you please quote the full title of any document you refer to during the course of this hearing, for the record. Please be aware of the microphones. I remind you that your transcript will become a matter for the public record. If for some reason you wish to make a confidential statement during today’s proceedings, you should request that the evidence be taken in closed session. If the committee grants your request, any public or media in attendance will be excluded from the hearing. Please note that until such time as the transcript of your public evidence is finalised, it should not be made public. I advise you that premature publication or disclosure of your evidence may constitute a contempt of Parliament and may mean that the material published or disclosed is not subject to parliamentary privilege. Members, if you could assist Hansard by referring to any particular pages or volumes of the budget statements in your questions, that would be useful. I might start by asking if any members have questions they would like to ask. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Yes. The first question I have is: in your budget papers last year you talked about the reciprocal travel concessions for WA seniors and the federal funding that had been provided. I was just wondering whether you could tell us whether or not you have been successful in arranging reciprocal travel concessions for WA seniors. Mr Waldock: I will start and Mark can finish. It has been progressing on the federal front. It has been mainly coordinated through the various seniors’ agencies in each state, although, clearly, they

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 2 have all coordinated their efforts with their public transport authorities, in whatever name they come. Where we are up to now is: my understanding is that it has in fact been approved in principle in that all states will have reciprocal rights for pensioners travelling out of state on other public transport systems. But my understanding is that one of the issues for us in WA is that we are questioning the formula they use. They used a formula that was based on both pensioner travel interstate plus the fare differential that we would have to offer by giving concessions to full fares. We think the formula is flawed. It is flawed, not so much in the percentage of interstate visitors we have, but in how they in fact developed the price differential between our fares versus the concessional fares that would apply. So there is an approval in principle, but indeed we are questioning, and the Minister for Transport, to my understanding, will be negotiating with the relevant federal minister regarding the actual money we get back. As a guide, I think we will be getting three per cent of the federal pot, and we believe it should be closer to six per cent, so that will be the base for negotiation. But in terms of when it is going to be actually introduced and implemented, I still think that is to go before COAG for a fifth time, and I do not think that has been announced. Have you got any later advice on that, Mark? [9.10 am] Mr Burgess: No. I think you have probably captured everything, Reece. Hon KEN TRAVERS: We do not have a date for implementation? Mr Waldock: No. Mr Burgess: No. Mr Waldock: But certainly in principle it is not a problem. Mr Burgess: The federal position was they were aiming for an implementation in January. I think that might have been optimistic. My understanding is a number of the states have not necessarily agreed to mainly the funding formula. It was $50 million roughly on the table of federal money over four years, and they employed Access Economics to do a model. As Reece has indicated, we do not think that model was quite right, in terms that WA was going to be disadvantaged in the allocation. Our minister has written back to Minister Macklin and put that position, and I am not sure if there has been a response at this stage. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Do you have any idea how many pensioners or Seniors Card holders access Transperth services? Mr Burgess: Could you say the question again? Hon KEN TRAVERS: Do you have any numbers of how many pensioners or WA Seniors Card holders access Transperth services? Mr Waldock: Yes, very good question. We might have to take that on notice. Certainly, the seniors is very popular, with over 298 000 cards on issue. To answer your question, we actually have 298 000 cards on issue, with a growth rate of about 15 per cent per annum. Remember that in terms of the Seniors Card and SmartRider card, it has only been going for just over two years. There are 298 000 cards, which is a fair percentage of the—what is the total seniors numbers, Mark; do you remember? Mr Burgess: No. I think it is just under 300 000. I think it is 290 000 or so. Mr Waldock: There are 298 000 cards, but I think the actual number of seniors is — Mr Burgess: — is not much more. Almost everyone has taken it up now, so that is roughly the number of seniors. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Have you got any idea how many of those cards are actually being used on Transperth services?

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 3

Mr Burgess: In toto, we can actually do a check, and we would have to let you know that. Hon KEN TRAVERS: And see how many have actually been used. Mr Burgess: But we can actually check how many have individually been used on Transperth services. That number reflects all seniors across the state, obviously—anyone who has applied to be a senior, because the card is now a dual purpose card. One side is their Seniors Card printed as their Seniors Card for any benefits they can get as a senior to do with their local council or whatever it might be. But on the other side it is their seniors SmartRider card, and obviously the chip is embedded in between, so it is a dual-purpose card. We can actually do a report for you on how many have ever been used on the Transperth system. Hon KEN TRAVERS: If you can take that on notice, that would be good. The CHAIRPERSON: Take that on notice, yes. Mr Burgess: I did, by pure chance, look at it only a few days ago on how many had been used on an individual day, and the day I checked was 10 000 seniors had used their card on that day, but that was a purely random day. Hon KEN TRAVERS: On any one day, you are looking at about 10 000 seniors. Mr Waldock: But it is fair to say that, because they are in fact distributed free, many seniors necessarily would not be using their card, but we will come back with a core number. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Do you have any indication of the estimated cost of providing free travel for seniors, age pensioners and disability support pensioners between 10.00 am and 3.00 pm on Monday to Friday. Mr Waldock: That cost was estimated in the order of just over $5 million per year. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Why is it not possible to commence the free travel for seniors between 10 and three on 14 December, as was previously advertised? Mr Waldock: It is possible. In fact, as I have indicated publicly, we gave the government a number of options, but we did argue that we thought the best option would be to hold it back until March. There were many reasons, but perhaps I can just pick some of those reasons. From a purist’s point of view in terms of our system, the fact that it will be a flashcard type arrangement, where different groups would show their cards, means that we would lose any information that our SmartRider system was picking up, so that was an internal issue. But perhaps more for the external and for the people who are affected—the seniors, pensioners and the disabled—the reasons for us were, one, that the bus companies, based on their contracts, do in fact get an incentive payment based on validations. Of course, we would not be able to manage that other than through some manual system. More importantly, we felt that for the sake of a few months—somewhere between three and four months, depending on when the final date is—we would be bringing in a system that would be confusing for many. To give you an example, any senior, pensioner or disabled pensioner would come into, say, the city on rail, and, during those particular hours, they would not be tagging on and tagging off through the normal gated system. During those hours they would actually step aside from those gates and go through a manual gate. Now, one could argue that is pretty simple to understand. During those hours you would go through, as I say, a normal gated system. Outside those hours, you would go through an open manual gate and you would just show your flashcard to the officer there. But, indeed, the issues would be if they made a mistake, we would then have to do manual transactions and adjustments to their card, because they would actually be charged; the current system would charge them if they went through the gated system. It is not just gates; it is validation anywhere. Anywhere they validated through, forgetting that the tag on, tag off was not appropriate for that particular period, there would have to be a manual adjustment. The other issue we saw, very importantly, is in three months’ time we would have a major educational program to argue that everybody should be going and validating through the tag on, tag off system again, rather

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 4 than doing a hybrid system that would have been effective for those three months. I guess some of it was for the issues of confusion and complexity, some of it was for contractor payments, and some of it was internal to us in terms of losing an enormous body of information that drives our decision making. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Those all sound very good for everyone other than seniors. What about the benefits to seniors of actually getting the free travel during that time as they were promised during the election campaign? Mr Waldock: I would not comment on that, but what I would say, indeed, is that, as you are aware, seniors during that period would have a DayRider with their smart cards depending on whether they get 15 per cent or 25 per cent. I think the DayRider comes in at something like $2.50. I acknowledge that, for a DayRider, all day they would be paying something like $2.50 rather than zero if they travel during those times, but, indeed, the DayRider gives them more added times than 10 to three as well. [9.20 am] So I acknowledge your comments, and we gave the best advice we thought at the time. Hon KEN TRAVERS: You said there were a number of options presented; what were the options that were presented? Mr Waldock: There are only two basic options: one to do a flashcard or one to wait until March. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So it was feasible to do it by doing a flashcard. Mr Waldock: Yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So it could have been implemented by the fourteenth. So why was it advertised that it would be starting on 14 December? Mr Waldock: When you say it was advertised, certainly there was a sign put up at the busport by one of our information companies, Serco. They in fact, I guess, had heard that it was likely to be before Christmas. They had many pensioners coming asking the question, and I guess in the spirit of trying to sort of advise as many people as possible, they inadvertently did put a sign up saying — Hon KEN TRAVERS: They did not put up a sign saying that it is starting before Christmas; they put up a sign saying that it is commencing on 14 December. They must have got that date from someone. Mr Waldock: They would have got it probably from us. That was definitely one of the options we put forward, yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: For it to commence? Mr Waldock: Yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: My understanding is that the Premier also on 15 October advised that it would start prior to Christmas. Mr Waldock: Prior to Christmas, but not 14 December. Hon KEN TRAVERS: No, he did not mention the date, but he mentioned that it would start prior. Mr Waldock: Yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So, again, someone must have advised him at that stage that it was going to be able to be implemented. Mr Waldock: It certainly did not come directly from me or the Public Transport Authority to my knowledge. Mr Burgess: I think one other thing, if I can add, is that the sign that was at the information shop at the busport was one A4 piece of paper, which a staff member using, unfortunately, misplaced

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 5 initiative had put on that wall, and it has been played out that there were signs all over buses and trains and the train stations, and it ain’t so. Hon KEN TRAVERS: My understanding is that there was information given out about the fourteenth; was it during Seniors Week? Mr Burgess: There was an attempt to put up information during Seniors Week, and there were some small flyers because there was a misunderstanding within the agency that it would be available. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So at some point there was an expectation in the agency that it would be available on 14 December. Mr Waldock: To be fair, the agency thought that when it put the options up—and I do acknowledge that I think we were surprised at the government’s response but we thought it was a good response; I am just surprised—certainly from my point of view, the issue of leaflets going out and the advice was an error by an agency and I have taken full responsibility for it. It should not have happened. Hon KEN TRAVERS: The lack of information that you would collect, what date are we talking about expecting to implement it now? Mr Waldock: We are still finalising that, but we think that the late March country, early April would be the date. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So we are talking three, maybe four months of lost information. Mr Waldock: That is it. Hon KEN TRAVERS: How critical is that to your organisation? I mean, you will pick that information up afterwards; you will get the same information this time next year. Why is that information so critical to your agency? Mr Waldock: I would not want to overstate it. It certainly was an issue because we are very proud of the way our agency works. Without question in terms of the data we get from SmartRider, unlike any other capital city in Australia, we actually have an enormous amount of data which we use. So you ask me how critical it is. Certainly it was critical in terms of contracted payments. I mean that was fundamentally an accounting issue, which we needed to in fact respond to; we are contractually obliged. But in terms of the data that we use in terms of decision making, of course we could have worked without it. But again that information is used on a weekly basis in terms of our analysis of what is happening in the system, and we would have wanted to know as soon as possible what sort of response rate, because quite honestly even things like the elasticities of demand for this new initiative we are guessing at. We do not know when prices go to zero what happens to demand. There is no formula; there is no model that we have actually seen in the world that can give us that information. So it is critical that we get a bit of a feel for what is happening, and to be working with an information-free zone would not have been ideal. Hon KEN TRAVERS: You could have gone back to the days when I was a bus driver where we manually recorded how many passengers got on the bus. Mr Waldock: We would have been doing that. That is what we would have had to have done. Hon KEN TRAVERS: I remember regularly doing that every time I took a bus out. The incentive payments, again, I cannot see why there could not have been a negotiated settlement with the bus companies in terms of a payment. They could then be ratified against the demand once the SmartRider system was in place, or against next year’s equivalent period of time. Mr Burgess: I think the answer is it can be. But what it is is just a series, as you are actually alluding to, of complications. It is just a whole series of complications that make it not a good solution.

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 6

Hon KEN TRAVERS: There is a series of issues that need to be addressed; I cannot understand why they are complications. I think the complication is for seniors who cannot now travel free when they were told that they would be able to travel free within the first 100 days of this government. Mr Burgess: I think the other thing is we do not like to make life complicated for seniors, and I am careful how I pitch this because we all want to think that we are all clever. I think most people are reasonably clever, but at the end of the day whenever we introduce something and—that is why SmartRider took a long time; we were very careful about how we did it in a staged introduction— whenever we make changes, not everyone understands, As Reece mentioned, the fact that a number of seniors, without doubt, would have gone up to fare gates or would have gone up to SmartRider card processors and, because their card would not have been recorded so that it was free, it would have actually taken a fare off. Then we are in the territory of in large numbers having to readjust people’s cards back out. Potentially that attracts issues of if they were due for a bank reload on their card; those sorts of things happen. We have to try to unpackage a whole bunch of stuff because the coding is not right yet; and that is certainly one of the significant complications we want to avoid. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Why is it taking so long to get the coding done? Mr Burgess: We do not think it is taking a long time. We think it is remarkably quick to work. Mr Waldock: As I say, if you compare it with New South Wales, I think it is now in its tenth year of trying to develop the Tcard and the Victorians are in their sixth year of trying to develop the myki card. So if you are asking why it takes so long, perhaps the question might be better directed to them, because these things are extremely complex. If you do not get it right, you in fact create enormous difficulties. Indeed, what is going to happen with our card, even though we are talking about March, we will need that card in early February to do extensive testing because if we do not get it right, we will have the wrong card. If you think we are being criticised for this particular delay, we will certainly be criticised far more with having a card that in fact is making significant errors. These pick up complexities as well; I mean, there are two issues. One, we would have had to have gone out for two quite distinctive education marketing campaigns; and it is critical again that we put as much information out, and that would have been a difficulty. I must say, and one can be dismissive but I do not think you should dismiss it, after people have been using a flashcard for some time and getting used to it, I think it would have been extremely difficult to convince them they did not actually necessarily have to tag on and tag off. It would have been, “I’ve always done this.” In fact people still do it on us. We actually have got some experience because we have been using this on Sundays for some time, and the experience is we still get pensioners saying, “I don’t have to tag on and tag off. I’ve got a pension card or a Seniors Card, that’s good enough.” Again, these cards—whether it is a student 50c fare or whether it is a concessional fare to pensioners—are a privilege and we do them, I think, on the basis indeed that SmartRider is the way, because it gives us enormous benefits as well, which I will not go into now. So indeed we would not want to in fact institutionalise a system where we are then going to have to change the whole education program and actually demand that people do tag on. I actually think there would have been some difficulties. Hon KEN TRAVERS: But I find pensioners are actually very resilient and very switched on. I think you used seniors as your first people to trial the smart card. Mr Waldock: They are fantastic; I think anybody is in fact. We have actually had some experience over some time now in SmartRider. It does not matter which group, when you change things, there are difficulties; they are resistant to change. Even when we have brought in 50c student fares, which we thought was a fantastic initiative, there were many parents that argued, “I want 50c with a normal ticket; I don’t want to use SmartRider.” Now that was an issue. Hon KEN TRAVERS: People may argue that, but they understand how the system works, and I would have thought if you said to pensioners, “You can walk through the gate, show your card and you get free travel. If you tag on and tag off, then you will be charged a fare, but if you show your

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 7 card and walk out, you get free travel”, that would have resolved your problem about having to do credits back into the system Mr Waldock: It would not — Hon KEN TRAVERS: And people who want to use the system free could use the system free starting — Mr Waldock: How would it resolve the problem about putting credits back in the system? Hon KEN TRAVERS: If you said to them, “If you do tag on and tag off, then you are not eligible for free.” At the moment every pensioner is going to have to pay for their travel between 10.00 am and 3.00 pm in the day. If you said to those pensioners, “Look, if you go through the gates and just show your card until we can introduce the proper system, you can travel free”, that would mean those that are switched on, want to take advantage of the system and are aware of it would be able to get the benefits of the election commitment that was made by the government. [9.30 am] Mr Waldock: With the greatest respect, I do not agree. What would have happened is that people would have made mistakes, and they would have accused us, and rightly so, by saying that we did not put out enough information; there was not a strong enough education program; we did not actually sell the message; and it was the government’s mistake—it was PTA’s mistake and they should not be suffering from it. Hon KEN TRAVERS: As a result of that now everyone has to pay. Mr Waldock: We put forward a number of issues that, for the sake of three months, could have been resolved. Maybe we are bureaucrats who want to get a perfect system, but our view is that that was the right decision. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Looking at it the other way: if after 14 December pensioners travel on the train between ten o’clock and three o’clock without tagging on and off, will they be fined? Mr Waldock: We would have to look very carefully at that. I do not think it will be a huge issue. I understand that the Pensioners League of has been on the radio suggesting that there should not be a push back of our policy. If there was, we would have to look at it. We make those judgements every day, but it is not to say that the advice we gave government and the government’s decision was wrong. We would have to look at it. Hon KEN TRAVERS: In the same way that you are saying that pensioners would react if they were given free travel and then had to complain, do you expect that pensioners — Mr Waldock: What I am saying is that it is naive to suggest that they would not expect us to make manual adjustments to their fares. I think they would. Hon KEN TRAVERS: If you made it very clear that if they tag on and tag off—at the moment you are penalising every pensioner for it. The alternate system is that pensioners would gain some benefit. At the time that this came out a comment was made that pensioners would not be able to understand it. That was terribly patronising and probably offensive to most pensioners. Mr Waldock: I did not make the comment. Hon KEN TRAVERS: I know that you did not, but comments were made at the time. Mr Waldock: To close this up: I think we disagree. I believe we would have had to make manual adjustments that would have been quite significant and it would not be good enough to say, “You should have understood.” Hon KEN TRAVERS: If pensioners take up the option and, for want of a better term, conduct a campaign of civil disobedience and travel free and do not tag off and on between 10 o’clock and three o’ clock, what would be PTA’s response?

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 8

Mr Waldock: My argument is that we would look at it and make a judgement call, but I hope that it does not become an issue. Hon KEN TRAVERS: I go now to the railway extension to Butler. Can you give an outline of what earthworks and preparatory works have been conducted for the extension of that railway line? Mr Waldock: There have been no earthworks for the extension to Butler. There have been earthworks between Butler station and Jindalee-Brighton station. That work has been done by the Western Australian Planning Commission. PTA has been project managing that work on its behalf. Hon KEN TRAVERS: What about planning works for the extension to Butler? Mr Waldock: For Butler, the master plan has been finalised; we actually have a completed master plan for Butler. It was completed about two months ago; therefore, about eight weeks ago there was a finished master plan. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Has there been any levelling of the Butler site and integration with the surrounding suburbs? Mr Waldock: There have been no works. The civil works, as I said before, has been undertaken by the WA Planning Commission between Butler station and Brighton-Jindalee station. Hon KEN TRAVERS: It is my understanding that as part of the works for the Butler station the surrounding areas were raised. Mr Waldock: No, they will be raised. There has been some testing, but no civil works has been done. Hon KEN TRAVERS: It is testing that has been carried out? Mr Waldock: There has been some geotechnical testing, and that is all. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Has funding been allocated to the extension? Mr Waldock: No. Hon KEN TRAVERS: What is your view of the implications of not commencing the construction of that project immediately? Mr Waldock: My view is that a number of people in the northern suburbs will be disadvantaged. If I can digress for a minute: it will be very interesting to see what the demand will be over the next 12 months to two years. We in the PTA are a little bit uncertain for two reasons. There are two trends that might act to counter each other. The first trend is that, generally, in economic hard times public transport becomes more popular because people are looking at better ways of managing the family budget. That is a positive for public transport. On the negative side, there is a clear correlation between fuel prices and public transport. We have seen fuel prices drop from $1.50 to about $1. While we might agree that is a short to medium term issue I am unclear what that will mean for public transport over the next few years. I suspect we will see reasonable growth on the northern line, particularly as we place more car parks there and put in more rolling stock next March. It is unclear to me what the growth would be. For the people in the northern corridor there is still capacity at both Currambine and Clarkson stations. Certainly, they would need to drive further than they would. It would have been a very popular project. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are you saying there is parking capacity at Clarkson? Mr Waldock: Yes, there is. Hon KEN TRAVERS: In what way? Mr Waldock: I have the latest car parking analysis. At Clarkson the Pay ‘n’ Display capacity is only 75 per cent full each day. We still have significant capacity there. In Currambine there is still significant Lock ‘n’ Ride capacity each day. Currently, we have capacity at both stations.

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 9

Hon KEN TRAVERS: Do you record the number of cars that are parked on the streets in those areas? I know that you do at Whitfords and Warwick. Mr Waldock: We do. We acknowledge what is happening there. I indicate that we hope to bring in additional car parking in those two areas within the next two years. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Do you have any figures on cars parking other than at the station? Mr Waldock: No, but we are aware there have been issues for local government, because local government share them with us. I understand that local governments—not only in those two areas but also in other areas, including Whitfords and Warwick—are looking at it. Hon KEN TRAVERS: How many spaces are available at Clarkson and Currambine? Mr Waldock: At Clarkson there are about 80 spaces available each day and there would be a similar number at Currambine. Both have about 80 bays vacant each day. Hon KEN TRAVERS: You mentioned fuel prices. With the SmartRider technology have you been able to identify any drop in patronage levels because of fuel prices dropping, or have they been constant? Mr Waldock: They are still growing. There is a lag effect and people’s behaviours take time to adjust. Anecdotally, and this is the best we can go on, it looks as though the demand for Perth car parking has increased over the past two months. If Perth CBD car parking is improving, it could mean, to some extent, that it is to the detriment of public transport. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Anecdotally a lot of the complaints I get from people in the northern corridor, and in fact almost from every line in Perth, is lack of capacity during peak hours. People cannot physically get onto the rail carriages. I realise that new carriages are on order. Mr Waldock: We acknowledge that it has been a bit of a squeeze. It depends on what standards one looks at. In India the standard is 12 people per square metre. If we have more than four people per square metre, I would be surprised. The CHAIRPERSON: They have them on the roof too! Hon KEN TRAVERS: I take it then that you are about to employee pushers. Mr Waldock: Big tall people like you. Hon KEN TRAVERS: One hundred and sixty bays in total would be filled up fairly quickly if demand continues to grow. Does Butler have about 800 parking bays? Mr Waldock: That is about right; as I remember, it is 780, but we will be bringing on new car parking capacity over the next three years. Having said that, I make the point that we will never be able to solve all the parking problems. [9.40 am] Mr Waldock: We are looking at bringing 3 000 car bays into the north-south system over the next four years, but that will be a huge issue for us. That is a huge challenge, but the day we put 3 000 bays in is the day that they will be full, and people will be saying, “What about some more bays?” It is a never-ending issue; I do not think any city in the world has solved it, and indeed, we have more Park ‘n’ Ride car parking capacity than any other city in Australia, so it is not as if one could argue that we skimp on our Park ‘n’ Rides. As I say, we have more in total than any other city in Australia. The CHAIRPERSON: That raises an interesting question for me. What is the Public Transport Authority doing about encouraging people to not even use their cars to get to train stations, and encouraging some of the things that we are interested in, such as light rail, cycling and walking? Mr Waldock: That is a good point. I cannot talk about light rail, but we have looked at all our stations in terms of all the modern motorised transport modes. Over the past three years we have

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 10 had a cycling facilitator, who has been working very closely with us to make sure that all our stations are far more cycle-friendly. Not only have we installed good storage facilities of different types, but we have also put enormous effort into trying to get access routes better prepared, better marked and more friendly, if we can. With every station we construct we put enormous effort into making sure that, when the stations are designed—perhaps unlike 10 years ago on the northern suburbs line—pedestrians and cyclists have every opportunity for good, first-class access. In terms of buses, the real challenge for us, I think, is to continually improve our feeder bus services to those stations. We have gone out with significant marketing campaigns. First of all there was the SmartRider campaign, in a wider sense, through the Department for Planning and Infrastructure. Certainly, in the area we realised that in some of those stations, despite all our efforts, people were not in fact using feeder buses. We have gone out with a marketing campaign very much targeted at all our customers, inviting them to use the feeder buses. We have seen significant growth. Mr Burgess: These are some of the percentages of people taken to the stations in the yellow zone— our big success stories. These are the statistics for weekdays in September: at Murdoch station, 57.3 per cent of train passengers came or left by bus; Bull Creek, 57.1 per cent; Canning Bridge— which now has the excellent connection to Curtin University, and the turn-around facility we put on—66.8 per cent of train passengers caught a bus to the train. The CHAIRPERSON: They do not have a choice! Hon KEN TRAVERS: I am trying to work out how the other 34 per cent get there! Mr Burgess: Other feeder bus to train station statistics include: Whitfords, 51.1 per cent; Warwick, 41.3 per cent; and Stirling, 53.6 per cent. They are the best usage statistics, but at stations at which we can put in good feeder bus services—as Reece said, the DPI people use their TravelSmart program to help promote them—they are very successful. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are you able to table a copy? Mr Burgess: Yes, sure. Mr Waldock: Does that answer some of the questions? The CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that is a start. Mr Waldock: We have a long way to go; we realise that. The CHAIRPERSON: That seems to be the logical solution. As you say, more car parks will just fill up. Mr Waldock: It is difficult, if we are going for high-rise parking, to pay $30 000 a bay. The issue for us is very clear. The CHAIRPERSON: Is that the figure for a single high-rise parking bay—$30 000 a bay? Mr Waldock: Yes. The CHAIRPERSON: That is a very heavy investment in parking is it not? Mr Waldock: It is a lot of investment. The CHAIRPERSON: If we were to use $30 000 on light rail, we might do rather well. Mr Waldock: I make the point that, whatever we do in terms of car parking, the feeder bus services or feeder public transport services, whether that be light rail or bus—certainly bus in the short to medium term—are, I think, a great deal of our future. The relationships between usage, frequency and travel time are very clear. The analysis is pretty clear: if we increase the frequency and reduce the travel time, people will come. Clearly, it is an enormous challenge in low-density cities. High- frequency bus services, particularly at their peak, are expensive. How to manage that is a challenge for all of us to try to work out.

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 11

Hon KEN TRAVERS: What is the at-grade cost of parking? Mr Waldock: It is somewhere between $7 000 and $9 000, depending on the ground conditions. Hon KEN TRAVERS: You mentioned the 3 000 bays you will be putting in. Have you yet identified where you will be putting those bays? Mr Waldock: I think we have identified that places in the northern area, because there had certainly already been some work done on that. Indeed, we have already actually finished stage 1, with some small increases — Hon KEN TRAVERS: Of those 3 000, are you including the stage 1 that was already completed by the previous government? Mr Waldock: Yes, I am. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So that is not 3 000 additional bays over and above what was previously— so the 3 000 includes the ones that were already completed? Mr Waldock: We are working on 3 000 bays, which includes the 1 500 that were planned before. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Many of which have actually been completed. Mr Waldock: No, not many of which have been completed. Hon KEN TRAVERS: The ones at Greenwood and Edgewater have—the stage 1 bays. Mr Waldock: Yes, those have, but in terms of the quantum of those, they are not significantly high. Nevertheless, I take the member’s point. We think that stages 3 and 4 are going to be very difficult. As we just discussed, the issue for us is where we can find land at grade that we can use. We have some pretty good ideas down south, especially at Cockburn and Mandurah. They are not difficult, but when we look at stations such as Murdoch and Bull Creek, it is enormously complex in terms of land availability; there will be none, unless we go up. It is the whole issue of access for roads and whether road systems allow that to happen. I will provide an example: at Murdoch, as it becomes a transit-oriented development, a major public hospital and a major regional centre, it will be very difficult for us to put more car bays in for commuters. I come back to the question about where we think we could look at putting in significant numbers of new bays. Stage 1, as the member said, was Edgewater and Greenwood. We have managed to add approximately 240 bays there. That is finished. We went out for consultation on Greenwood and Whitfords last month—the committee would be aware of that, I guess. We think that will provide somewhere in the order of 350 bays. I think we are pretty much signed off on that. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Three hundred and fifty bays at Greenwood and Whitfords? Mr Waldock: Yes. That gives us something in the order of 600 car bays. The other 900 will become progressively more difficult. Greenwood and Whitfords — Hon KEN TRAVERS: Sorry, I missed that: 600? Mr Waldock: I am saying that the first stage was 240 bays. Hon KEN TRAVERS: When you add the 350, you get 600. Sorry, I just want to make sure that I am following this. If you are referring to this document that was produced in April 2008, you are talking about the area at Greenwood as stage 2 and the area at Whitfords also as stage 2, and that will produce another 350 bays. Mr Waldock: Yes. I think we will actually find another 600 car bays without too much pain. It then becomes more difficult. Greenwood is a real issue in terms of car parking for the local community. We will have to work through that with some difficult community consultation. If we do not do that at Greenwood, we will perhaps have to look at—Greenwood is not a bad station to look at building up the Park ‘n’ Ride facility, because it is not a bus interchange station. If we are looking at the hierarchy of where to provide more parking, I guess some of the criteria would have to be that more

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 12 parking would be less necessary at stations at which there are already bus good services and good interchange. However, stations at which there will be no bus services of any significance in the future are the ones to have a close look at. [9.50 am] Greenwood may have some opportunities for a multistorey car park, but I have already indicated some of the concerns we have with that. We will be looking at that. The more difficult one is Whitfords. The CHAIRPERSON: Before we get off Greenwood, you say that there is some community concern. My obvious question is: which bits are reasonably significant bush that you can knock down to build more car parks? Mr Waldock: That is road reserve. We will put lovely buffers in there to keep the bush. We do not expect that that will be the way forward. We will be pursuing consultation on those two northern sites. We have commuters. We have done all the analysis of where these commuters come from. The Park ‘n’ Rides serve a very large area. How do we manage their needs? We talk about bus services. That is an option. Some people in the business of public transport do not come to work and go home. They travel by “chaining”. In that case, where they go and pick up the kids and do their shopping, that is where cars come in. We need to service a number of our customers with motor vehicles in the future. We do not have too many easy answers. We will continue to look at it. One of the options we do have, which is not listed, is Stirling. Stirling is looking quite good because it is part of the Stephenson plan and the major regional centre. There is some land there. We have two options and we might be able to look at putting in 400 to 500 car bays. That is on land that was previously the old tip site. That might be very useful land in the medium term. We will not be putting in fully finished car parking facilities but overflow car parking facilities. Even if the Stephenson Highway does go in in whatever form, or the “Stephenson Boulevard” as it might be called, we will be freeing up some land currently not being able to be used because of the freeway. We do see some opportunities at Stirling as well. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are you fully utilising capacity at Stirling at the moment? Mr Waldock: In terms of car parking on our land we are. There is council land, which we are talking to the council about, and there is road reserve land to the north. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are all the bays currently being filled up? I know in the past when you had problems with capacity on the line, Stirling was not filling up because people could not get on to the trains at Stirling because they were full up. Mr Waldock: We have changed the configuration of trains as best we can. Stirling is full by 7.10 am in the free area and the Park ‘n’ Ride is full at 8.10 am. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are you able to table those? Do you have copies of when the car parks fill up? Mr Waldock: Yes, I can certainly table that. I might leave out the remarks. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Where will the other 3 000 bays be located? Mr Waldock: That is 500 plus 600, which is 1 100, and then we will look at what we need to do at Greenwood with Greenwood stage 3. We will get something out of Greenwood. We may get close to 1 500 in the northern suburbs. We have not made any decisions about that. As I said before, we have not made a decision about the southern suburbs, so we may be able to get 570 bays at Cockburn Central. That will be very useful because we get more complaints there than anywhere else from people being fined for parking in wrong areas. We think we can get 70 bays out at Warnbro. It is not an easy one because it has a very sensitive bush site and we have had to try to manage that. We have some additional land at Mandurah so we may be looking at another 230 bays. All that adds up to 870 bays. After that, it gets more difficult. We will be looking at all those issues

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 13 and coming back to government with some plans when we think through the complexities of where we go. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Based on what you are saying, to build 3 000 car bays, including the ones that were constructed before the election, will you need to go to high rise to do it? Mr Waldock: I do not know. We may have to. It is certainly an option we will be looking at. We will also be looking for any opportunity to buy land to better utilise our rail and road reserves. It is certainly a possibility. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Would that involve increased fees for parking if you do go to high rise? Mr Waldock: The policy on that has not in any way been defined but we will be reviewing parking fees. At this stage we are working out policies and plans. We have not gathered formally. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Is privatising any of the parking an option? Mr Waldock: People talk about privatising parking but working on the numbers I gave you before, unless people are prepared to pay $20 per bay per day, nobody like Wilson Parking would even think about it. The notion of private parking is very exciting until you do the numbers. Hon KEN TRAVERS: I am not encouraging that. I just want to know whether it is an option you are considering. Mr Waldock: I will consider it if anybody is interested but I do not think anybody will be interested. Hon KEN TRAVERS: But it is an option that may be considered? Mr Waldock: I do not know how it would be done. It would be difficult to justify. Hon KEN TRAVERS: We have covered parking. Has work commenced on planning for the Ellenbrook line? Mr Waldock: No, it is extremely early days. We are still working out the 20-year master planning cycle. That is our first challenge in getting that work done. We have been appropriated funds for that line in the budget process. We will be forming that as a matter of priority. In a perfect world, we would be setting a 20-year master plan with analysis of patronage, cost estimates at some level, whether it is the P50 level, which is 50 per cent, a probability you will get your cost plus or minus 20 per cent, and you would also be looking at the whole cost-benefit analysis before you move into specific lines. To answer your question, we have been putting a lot of effort into getting this 20-year master plan team together to try to kick-start that particular project. Ellenbrook will be one of the key areas that we will be looking at. We will also be doing some more detailed work in Ellenbrook. We expect that to start early next year. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are you saying that the timing of Ellenbrook is subject to the outcomes of the 20-year master plan? Mr Waldock: No, I am sharing our thinking about our priorities at present. Ellenbrook will happen next year. A number of projects will probably be run in parallel to the 20-year planning cycle because we do not have time to do a 20-year plan over the next year or year and a half and then come back and say that we can work on these projects because, clearly, government expect us to have better developed plans through that cycle. At the same time we are doing that, we will be doing projects like the Perth-Bunbury fast track and Ellenbrook, and we will be looking at projects like the north east corridor for rapid fast bus services. They are the projects that will be running in parallel to the 20-year plan. I am just sharing our priorities at the moment with you in terms of what I want to see kicked off very quickly. That will be kicked off very shortly. Ellenbrook will be next year. [10.00 am]

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 14

Hon KEN TRAVERS: You said there was funding in the budget for the 20-year master plan. Are there any changes to the 20-year master plan you are talking about doing now to the one that was commenced by the previous government, or is it the same master plan? Mr Waldock: The master plan was never commenced by the previous government. The master plan was going to be done by the previous government. We certainly never had it — Hon KEN TRAVERS: But the funding for it though, was that a decision that has been made — Mr Waldock: No, this is new money under the Liberal-National coalition government. Hon KEN TRAVERS: How much have they allocated to it? Mr Waldock: $6 million over three years. Hon KEN TRAVERS: But in terms of the actual scope of the master planning, is it any different to the one that was — Mr Waldock: It may be. In fact when the panel is appointed, it will be reviewing the scope and the terms of reference. That will be its first job. Hon KEN TRAVERS: In terms of Butler, where does that fit into the 20-year master plan? Because the planning has already been completed on that — Mr Waldock: Clearly, Butler will be looked at as part of both—not just Butler, the whole northern corridor to Alkimos, both in terms of demand and timing for when that would happen or when that should happen. Hon KEN TRAVERS: But the planning for the Butler section has been completed? Mr Waldock: It has been completed. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So it is a matter of just — Mr Waldock: That will be factored in, but it has been completed. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Returning to Ellenbrook: at this stage no work has commenced on Ellenbrook? Mr Waldock: No work has been commenced on Ellenbrook. Hon KEN TRAVERS: In terms of things like choosing route options, how will that be determined? Is that part of the 20-year master plan, or will that be a separate feasibility study or a separate study for Ellenbrook? Mr Waldock: It will be a separate feasibility built study for Ellenbrook, yes. They will feed into each other, but certainly Ellenbrook will—probably because of the more specific—they will be looking at certainly two routes, as we know; the route into Bassendean station, and the route into Bayswater station. Hon KEN TRAVERS: What involvement will the local community have in that process? Mr Waldock: I would expect that, like the 20-year master plan, it will certainly go through public consultation as well. Hon KEN TRAVERS: When would you expect the feasibility study for the Ellenbrook line to be completed? Mr Waldock: I would say probably the feasibility study—not the master plan—by mid next year. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Then the master planning will come after that. So when would you expect your master planning to be completed, ready to commence construction of the Ellenbrook line? Mr Waldock: I would have thought perhaps—and I am looking at Peter here—perhaps the end of 2010.

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 15

Hon KEN TRAVERS: Do you have any indication of how many additional rail carriages you will need to service the Ellenbrook line? Mr Waldock: That would be part of both studies, both the feasibility studies and certainly the master planning. I would guess, though, that it would—look, it all depends on, as you would appreciate, the frequencies and the demand. I would be guessing, but I would have thought you would not get away with anything less than five three-car sets probably, so that is in the order of 15 rail cars. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So with the 15 sets that are on order at the moment, will they be used in the existing system, or are some of those able to be used for the Ellenbrook line? Mr Waldock: No, I think the timing is quite different. I would hope that we will be seeing new orders before the Ellenbrook line is finished. Hon KEN TRAVERS: In terms of lead times for new rail carriages, what is the current lead time to order new rail carriages? Mr Waldock: About two years. If you work on two years, you would not be too far off. It is between two and 2.5 years, depending on some of the long lead item components. But we think that two years is generally what — Hon KEN TRAVERS: To start the delivery, or to complete the—if you had a big order — Mr Waldock: To start the delivery. So if you put an order in today, your first rail car should come through in about two years. Hon KEN TRAVERS: If other states get in ahead of us, what impact will that have on our ability to get rail cars? Mr Waldock: Certainly, that will be difficult, but we have actually had a dedicated line in Maryborough in Queensland. It is a new line that has been put in pretty much for us. So whilst there are always those risks, perhaps the risks are not as great as they were two years ago when we did not have this new line. Hon KEN TRAVERS: But if Infrastructure Australia funds other rail systems across Australia, is there not a risk for us in obtaining future rail stock if we do not get our orders in soon? Mr Waldock: Sure. Infrastructure Australia, I do not think, will ever fund rolling stock. But you are quite right: if they fund other railways—but the only railways that would impact on Maryborough would be QR and New Zealand. New Zealand has been talking about buying rolling stock for the best part of a decade and still has not put its money on the table. So it is really QR itself. You are quite right, I think the big risk would be from QR’s plans. They have very—what is the word?— very — Hon KEN TRAVERS: Ambitious? Mr Waldock: — optimistic and exciting and ambitious plans. Hon KEN TRAVERS: They want to catch up to you, Reece! Mr Waldock: That is right! Hon KEN TRAVERS: Every other, as they would have called them in the old days, Commissioner for Railways is jealous of you, I think. So you are comfortable that you will be able to start building Ellenbrook line starting in about 2011, which was the original time line? You do not need to put a rolling — Mr Waldock: No, no, no. I am quite comfortable that rolling stock will not be an issue. Hon KEN TRAVERS: You mentioned the feasibility of the Perth-Bunbury high-speed train: where is that up to and when do you expect it to be released?

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 16

Mr Waldock: We said we would finish a feasibility study in about mid next year; that was the earlier undertaking. I think that is still fairly much working to program. Whilst some of it would appear to be very exciting, like the opportunity to run down the new southern suburbs railway and then take the alignment of the new Peel deviation, or the Bunbury highway, that is probably the easy bit. It gets a little bit more difficult in terms of which route you take south of there, and so that is perhaps one of their challenges, to just look at the different options for routes south of there. It is also the complexities of just how we take the railway in through the area into the centre of Bunbury, particularly because LandCorp has got a major development on the foreshore down there now. There is a fair bit of consultation, so I think we have got a way to go in terms of the consultation in terms of the route. Another issue will be the environment, of course. We even some of the perhaps more—what do we call it?—perhaps prosaic issues, like how it would work in the underground railway station and where we would turn it—because they will be diesels; they will be very modern DMUs, but they will be diesel; they will not be electric—and even issues such as ventilation and even loading and unloading, when we have got very much a station meant for fast loading and unloading in central Perth, and how we would handle luggage. So there are a number of issues that need to be worked through. It will be a little bit clearer by, I think, about mid next year, when we will have an idea of both costs and the options. One of the things that we are very mindful of, though, is that the Australind trains now are getting old. We might try and work them through to about 30 years, but that means we need to make a decision probably in the next five years. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So when do you expect the feasibility study to actually be completed? Mr Waldock: Mid next year. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Is that expected to be a public document, or a document for public comment, or — Mr Waldock: I am sure—it will be the minister’s decision, but I would have thought so. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Has any planning started for stage 2 of the ; and have any allocations been made for new stations on that line yet? Mr Waldock: Stage 2 of the Mandurah line? Hon KEN TRAVERS: In terms of additional railway stations in particular. Mr Waldock: Railway stations? There has certainly been some early work done, but it is fair to say that we are not putting too much energy into it because it is not in the future capital works plan. I think there are some exciting prospects, particularly between Warnbro and Mandurah, where we might be able to put a major Park ‘n’ Ride but also use that as a future new land development down that way, as you would be aware, so that is probably one of them. Also we are looking at just south of Cockburn Central as one. So the only one I can say that we are doing any real work on, because all the rest are unfunded and there is no specific plans by the government, is the South Perth station. We actually have commenced significant planning work on the South Perth station, which is a funded program. Hon KEN TRAVERS: What is your estimated completion date for South Perth station at the moment? Mr Waldock: I do not think it has changed; I think it is 2012-13. Would that be right, Peter? Mr King: Yes, 2012-13 is the target date, and that is the funded structure of the construction. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So that has not been brought forward or sped up; it is just still on the same time line that it has been on? It has not slipped back? Mr Waldock: No, it is holding. One of the problems with South Perth, as you can appreciate, in terms of public transport is that, where you like to get a 360-degree patronage, I think we have got

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 17 about a 70-degree there. It will be challenging in terms of making it work really well, especially for walk-ons, as that is what it will be, a walk-on station. [10.10 am] Hon KEN TRAVERS: Planning for the railway line to the airport? Mr Waldock: Yes, that is another one. That is not funded through any of the ones I have mentioned. That is funded through the federal government. They have provided $3 million to do that. In fact, I think in last weekend’s paper, we invited submissions from consultants to assist us in some of the engineering aspects and detailed engineering. That is moving in terms of at least doing the detailed study and planning of how that might look. It seems to me that we are actually now working relatively well with the airports, too. It seems to me that the airport will be looking at both the consolidation of the airport and the opportunities for passenger rail to be part of that particular long-term plan. We would hope by 2016 that at least a decision will be made with the consolidation that there would be either a railway station or plans for a railway station to be part of the airport. Hon KEN TRAVERS: 2016? Mr Waldock: That is when consolidation will be finished. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are you looking at any other systems to the airport in the meantime? Mr Waldock: No. Mark can talk about that. We have done a lot of work looking at our buses. We can do it with public transport. Public transport buses are not generally very good at this because they are not set up for luggage, for a start. It is not ideal and it is quite expensive. We did an exercise last year in terms of what we would need, and of course we do know that public transport, if you run a normal frequency service, most of it would be empty. It is only when planes come in that it is full. It is not without its challenges. Indeed, a lot of good airports—Melbourne is a good example—they have actually got privately contracted coach services to provide that service and they do a pretty good job. We still think that should be the way to go—coaches and taxis. We hope that taxi business gets a bit better in the next few years as perhaps more drivers become available. But it is an issue. To answer your question in a roundabout way—no, we are not really looking at public transport providing that. We certainly have not been given funding and it is probably not our preferred view. You might want to pick up on that, Mark. Mr Burgess: I just add to Reece’s point that typically when you go to an airport, you are coming from your private address and you want to leave from that point and go directly to the airport. Most people do not want to go out and find a bus stop somewhere with their bags and so on. Vice versa, on the way home from the airport, they generally want point-to-point transport with their luggage, so the idea in the current climate of putting a timetabled bus service through there—which there is one, but the issue is it could be beefed up if that was a priority — Hon KEN TRAVERS: To the international airport or just the domestic? Mr Burgess: Just the domestic. Again, the passengers who come there typically want to go directly home or to a hotel. A timetabled bus route will not achieve that. It will go on a fixed route somewhere through the city. The buses are not designed to have luggage, unlike the special charter buses that operate out to the airport. That is part of the careful analysis that needs to be done about public transport solutions to airports because some of them have a history of failure, so you want to be very careful where you invest. Hon KEN TRAVERS: The 2016 date—do you expect to have an operating line to the airport by then? Mr Waldock: I do not know. I think there are lots of issues that need to be sorted out. This is what the $3 million study is about, to further understand the opportunities. It is fair to say, as Mark said, certainly the airport Sydney railway line was an unmitigated disaster in terms of the PPP, although

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 18 it is a little bit better now. The Brisbane one was also an absolute disaster until they wrote off the investment dollars to a low level and, because of the congestion in Brisbane at present, it does seem to be having a significant growth impact. They almost go through two cycles before they actually justify themselves. Having said that, our one will be a little more exciting, we think, because if we do a railway line out there, we will also be looking at taking the railway line out further and providing, I guess, an opportunity for a very, very large Park ‘n’ Ride to service all the hills. The hills, as you would understand, member, being a bus driver, has never been an easy place to access—the low density, difficult roads. I think they would actually love to come into a large Park ‘n’ Ride and have a 15-minute rail trip to the middle of the city. That is what we would be looking at. Hon KEN TRAVERS: The study that you are doing with the commonwealth is looking at extending it beyond the airport to the Forrestfield, High Wycombe, Maida Vale areas? Mr Waldock: We are looking at going one station further. Hon KEN TRAVERS: That is part of the study that is occurring? Mr Waldock: Yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: I know there was an option of even looping around as opposed to a station—is that being considered? Mr Waldock: That is an option for the engineers; this is part of this consultancy we have just — Hon KEN TRAVERS: Has any work been done on extending the line from Thornlie to Canning Vale? Mr Waldock: That will be part of the 20-year master plan and it will be looked at very closely. There are many different views on that. That will be, as I say, picked up as part of that particular study. Hon KEN TRAVERS: With the 20-year master plan, will that look at light rail? I know people have talked about the option of light rail feeding out of Thornlie to Canning Vale. Is that picked up in the master plan? Mr Waldock: It will look at all modes, it will look at opportunities—different routes, different modes. It will certainly pick up the light rail. The work has been done by DPI in terms of Subiaco to East Perth down to the UWA and to Charles Gairdner as well. It will pick up any work that has been done to date and it will set out, I guess, priority and timing of how we would like to go forward with public transport. Hon KEN TRAVERS: As I understand it, with the possibility of co-locating at Charles Gairdner, the women’s hospital, and also the children’s hospital, plus the growth at Charles Gairdner, there is the need for some form of public transport system into that area. Physically, you will not be able to move the vehicles in and out of that area; people will need to access it by public transport. Mr Waldock: The original terms of reference will be reviewed, but that included some major destinations and how we manage that. It is certainly part of the terms of reference. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Is there any more work being done on light rail in terms of plans, preliminary plans or drawings; other than the DPI work? Mr Waldock: Not by us. There has been some work done at Curtin University, looking at opportunities in that area. Peter Newman has been involved in that and there have been a number of workshops. I am sure they will be feeding into the 20-year master plan as well. If you are asking us specifically has there been any work done—no. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Have you got any idea of the funding for the 3 000 bays? I think $49 million has been allocated for that. Is that sufficient?

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 19

Mr Waldock: I think so. Certainly the easy ones I mentioned earlier, that does not get us there, but the easy ones I think only take us up to about $20 million. Mr King: $18 million. Some of that has been consumed already constructing bays. In addition to that — The CHAIRPERSON: Can I get you to speak a little louder, please. Mr King: The 1 500 bays that are currently in budget, their total cost was $18 million. In addition, the additional bays have been costed at $33 million as part of election commitments. Hon KEN TRAVERS: That is only an additional 1 500 for $33 million? Mr King: Yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: It is not an additional 3 000? Mr Waldock: No. There would seem to be, on the face of it, some opportunities — Hon KEN TRAVERS: If I remember correctly, you were saying that you see it very difficult to provide additional parking at the Warnbro station. Mr Waldock: Yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: The option will be to build a new station to the south of Warnbro? Mr Waldock: No, I did not say that. Hon KEN TRAVERS: I think you talked about there being an option for a new station between Warnbro and Mandurah. Mr Waldock: I do not think it is part of this initiative. Once you start looking at a new station, you are looking at $30 million before you start. Hon KEN TRAVERS: In terms of the Warnbro area, basically between Cockburn Central and Mandurah it is unlikely that there will be additional bays provided? Mr Waldock: Yes. In fact, one of the options there is to look at better bus services. Indeed, Warnbro station, whilst it was originally intended to be, we might need to rework those bus services and rework the access and all the rest. We either build new car bays in that whole corridor or we look at some better bus service. There will need to be something done. Warnbro is already a very popular station, as you know. Seventy car bays—you will not even see — Hon KEN TRAVERS: My understanding is that there are problems about the bus services because a lot of the bus services go to Rockingham and not Warnbro. Are you looking at whether you can actually take bus services directly into Warnbro? I think that adds considerably to the time that people are on the buses. Is that an issue that you are looking at? Mr Burgess: As you know, in the original plans there was going to be an interchange at Warnbro. That was one of the things, in the very early days of the exercise that was taken away. That was related to the cost of the wider project. The bus services were redesigned principally to go to Rockingham. There is one bus stand, by my recollection, at Warnbro and there is a route that goes there, but predominantly, as you say, they go up to Rockingham station. Yes, we have had feedback with passengers—they would rather go directly to Warnbro. We certainly have a business case that we have put up before in our capital works planning program, but it is not a funded project at the moment. [10.20 am] Mr Waldock: I must say that Rockingham does—we might need to revisit that just in terms of the study because there is an additional up to 1 000 bays that could be provided at Rockingham, but if we do that, Rockingham would then become a very large centre in terms of both vehicles and bus services. But that is, I guess, one of those options I mentioned earlier.

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 20

Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are you looking at extra bays on any of the other lines—Midland, Armadale, Fremantle? Mr Waldock: It is not part of the funded program but we actually have been, as part of our minor capital works, working with local governments to try to improve something. Indeed, some of the lines are a bit easier, not for large-scale parking but for continued sort of, you know, expansion along the corridor because we have quite wide corridors both in the Midland and Armadale lines, so we will continue to look at those opportunities as we go through—and we have been. We have actually increased parking on some of those lines and I know that a number of local government councils keep writing to me asking about more, and we have to continue to look at that based on funding. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So at this stage there is no formal timetable to provide any additional parking at any of those stations. Mr Waldock: No formal timetable. Hon KEN TRAVERS: All right. The new rail carriages that start arriving, I think, this month and then come into service in May—March next year? Mr Waldock: March next year, yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Have you already started to allocate which lines they will be allocated to? Mr Waldock: We have a plan for how we allocate them; that is right. We will be allocating according to need, as you might expect. I guess — Hon KEN TRAVERS: Whose need is greatest at the moment? Mr Waldock: That is true, too. We think Midland and the northern suburbs are probably the first two that come to mind. Certainly, the allocation would be at the end of it, though, after we get these 15 rail car sets. We will have taken six by two rail car sets—the old A series, six of those two-car sets and they will have been migrated or transitioned to the other old lines, so we will be sort of working both. That is the current plan. It will change, but that is the plan. I think Midland will probably get one of those early six by twos because that is the area—we probably get more complaints from the Midland line than any other line. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So the first ones that come in will go on to the northern line but — Mr Waldock: They will go to the northern line but we will cascade some of the old ones down, yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: But that will then free-up the two-car sets to go across to the Midland line. Mr Waldock: That is it; yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So at this stage is there a formal plan that you can provide us? Mr Waldock: I think there is a formal plan; I have not got it on me. I have seen the formal plan but I just do not remember exactly—I am certainly aware of it—and Midland would be the first. Hon KEN TRAVERS: The first one arrives in March, and then how often — Mr Waldock: The second one arrives in March, too, because the first one should have been in January, by the contract. And it is not rail cars—the rail cars, as we all know, have been very good. The B series has been an excellent rail car, but Bombardier are having some issues with the communications because they are changing the—having an open system of communications, which is better for the future but there is short-term pain, so we will get two in March and then one virtually every six to seven weeks after that for two years. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Okay. Do you expect there to be a shortfall of demand in terms of your projections? I mean, will those 45 carriages be fully utilised or will you have a surplus at the end of that?

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 21

Mr Waldock: It is fair to say that we are running the system at the present moment with virtually no spares. We are actually world-class in terms of our spares ratio, so, indeed, we will be actually allowing more trains to be available for maintenance and spare capacity because nobody does it like we do. I think those trains—the B series—are working pretty hard, so if you are asking the question, I think what we are really freeing up is another 14 rail cars of the B series. However, in terms of whether that will be enough, I think we all agree there is latent demand in the system now; people are not using the system at times because they do not want the crush, they find the parking difficult and it is all a bit too much hassle, and perhaps with fuel coming down they will drive their cars. I think that when there is more capacity in the system, they will be using it. If you ask me whether in two years’ time, what the system looks like in terms of crowding, I am not sure. It will be a lot better than it is now. The issue for us is just how much new growth will come on. If you take away the New MetroRail, that gives us immediate fillip of 25 per cent growth in rail, but if you just forget that, what is the underlying growth? The underlying growth has been in the order of some five to six per cent per annum. As I mentioned earlier, I am not exactly sure what the next few years will bring, but I think those rail cars will be very popular and I do not think anybody will say during the peak these rail cars are running empty; they will still have a lot of demand. Two years hence, 15 new car rail sets—that is the equivalent to about a 25 per cent increase in capacity on the whole system. It has got to be a huge opportunity for us. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Moving on, the next question is about the Mirrabooka bus station as part of the Mirrabooka regional centre improvement strategy. Can you tell me whether that project for the redevelopment of the bus station is still underway, and have you got sufficient funds to complete that project? Mr Waldock: I think that question is better directed to DPI; it is their project. We have only ever been, I guess, part of it in that we were allocated some moneys some period ago. The moneys, we argue, are not enough, so what we have done is taken it up to 85 per cent design, and that is where we have stopped, subject to those funding issues being sorted through DPI and government. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Right; so at the moment it is on hold, subject to further funding. Mr Waldock: It is on hold from our point of view, yes. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Right. In the last budget there were a number of funding allocations for different projects: upgrades at Armadale, Kelmscott; redevelopment of the Edgewater station; some refurbishments at the Queens Park station. Are all those projects still online and on schedule? Mr Waldock: They are certainly online and on schedule; I do not think any of them have slipped at this stage. Edgewater was a two-year project, which we have commenced. Queens Park, I think, was for a year for 18 months’ time and it is only a small upgrade. We will probably do that with our own internal teams, but, yes, I think there has been no slippage in any of those to my knowledge. Hon KEN TRAVERS: All right. Also, at the Stirling station there have been a lot of complaints about accessing the Stirling centre, the shopping areas and the like from the Stirling station. Is there any work going on to address that problem? Mr Waldock: Yes, the Stirling alliance has been formed and that Stirling alliance will come through shortly with some plans, I guess. The Stirling alliance, if you are not aware, but you may well be aware, is with the Stirling City Council, it is with DPI, it is with Main Roads—it is with all the key players. The PTA is sort of a small player there, but certainly as part of that they are well aware of the issue and they will be coming back with a plan and we may be part of that plan. Hon KEN TRAVERS: All right. Just going back to the growth study, you gave it to us, but are you able to table—take on notice—the last four years’ patronage growth, and any projected demand growth that you may have used in determining the additional carriages that you have ordered? Mr Waldock: Yes, we can do that. Yes, that is fine. We have the numbers but we do not have the percentages so we will make sure we provide that to you. Percentage form is much more useful than

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 22 absolute numbers. Perhaps, just as a bit of a guide, in buses between 2007-08 and 2008-09 to date, so if we just compare months, it will be what we have seen in buses. I will give you fare-paying boarding because it is a better indication of demand than total boardings—because of the way we run our feeder bus services it can be a bit distortionary—but if you look at fare-paying boardings, which are close to what we call a “journey”, buses have gone up 5.5 per cent in the comparative period to the year before, and trains have gone up 48.8 per cent, but, of course, a lot of that is, as you would be aware, the southern suburbs — Hon KEN TRAVERS: The new line. The CHAIRPERSON: So, it is a 12-month period. Mr Waldock: It is a comparative period for—it is really July, August, September, October—those four months because we could do the whole year, but we are trying to actually give you a bit of an indication from since we put the budget down—that is, what has happened from July through to now in terms of corresponding periods before we had a southern suburbs railway line. The railway line started in December, so that is, I guess, a good estimate of what is happening on the system over the past four months compared with the previous four months of the corresponding year. The CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are there currently any plans to increase or establish new feeder bus services to the railway line on any of the lines? [12.30 pm] Mr Waldock: We did some of that in the northern suburbs, as you are aware, before the election. At the present moment, there are no plans. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Is the feeder bus service to the Greenwood station still going ahead? Mr Burgess: It is not funded at the moment. Hon KEN TRAVERS: You are talking about the increase in the shoulder? Mr Waldock: Yes, the shoulder. Hon KEN TRAVERS: At the moment there are no plans to increase any bus services or feeder bus services. Mr Waldock: The only new one is with the Glendalough and Stirling stations—the so-called CAT bus—but that was semi-funded by the private sector. Hon KEN TRAVERS: I know problems have been identified in some areas on the southern railway line. I think one is the Herald Avenue Senior Citizens Centre, which used to have a bus service, and now does not. Are you looking at reviewing any of those routes, to add them back in areas that are now missing out as a result of the changes that were made as part of an ongoing review? Mr Waldock: I will get Mark to respond to that. We have reviewed a number of them because—I would point out that, as you are aware, in the bus business you cannot please everybody all the time, and it is an enormously difficult challenge to balance up that. Mr Burgess: We have obviously had a close look at the Herald Avenue thing a number of times, and while I acknowledge that it is an issue, it is generally the same couple of people who keep writing to us each time. We have looked at it a number of times. The issue is that where the buses go to changed fundamentally—in that case, they go to the Bullcreek station—so, given that the endpoint, if you like, has changed, naturally the bus routes tend to change, whereas those were bus routes either to Booragoon or through to the city before, and predominantly through to the city. They can still get to the Herald Avenue Senior Citizens Centre, but it just means they have to make a transfer, and I understand why they do not like that, but I am not sure that there is a lot we can do about it, in a world in which we have many more service kilometres—I am not saying a minuscule

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 23 number; I am saying a lot more—we actually have a lot of other priorities we need to address, then you might put a bus route there, but it would be a fair way down the track in terms of priorities. Hon KEN TRAVERS: On that point, what is the lead time to order new buses? I know we have a standard contract. Mr Waldock: It is a lot less. In fact, we have a set contract that runs up to 2011, but six months is enough to order new buses. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So, if we wanted additional buses, we can start to get them delivered within six months? Mr Burgess: Yes. That local facility obviously has a cap in terms of how much you can produce, but at the moment it only works one shift, for example. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are there any plans for a review of the bus lane along Beaufort Street, and to make that public? Mr Waldock: There are no plans, basically. One of the great difficulties we have is road priority. It was a Department for Planning and Infrastructure initiative more than the Public Transport Authority. If we are going to put in bus lanes in the future, we have got to make sure they are in areas where they make a difference. We think the single biggest thing we can do in public transport in this state is to provide greater road priority for buses, and indeed, everywhere in the world where they are actually trying to change public transport and the way people behave, a lot of energy is going into bus priority and segregation. If there is one thing we need to look at in this state, it is getting some of those clear priorities up. This was never the right one. We are all mindful of the empty lane syndrome, when you put a bus lane in and people do not see buses. It is all the wrong thing we want to sell about public transport, so I would suggest that was never perhaps the best decision, but I do not think we should ever pull out bus lanes unless we have to but, going forward—we are talking about this north east fast corridor—we will be looking at bus priority. Bus priority firstly gives an enormous sense of marketing in terms of what we offer and is also very efficient in terms of bus turnaround times. Hon KEN TRAVERS: I am not necessarily arguing against the bus lane, but just a review of the impacts and whether there are ways of ameliorating the impacts as a result of it and how they are operating. Mr Waldock: I think that probably was not the best choice that we made, because it was not a very congested bit of road for buses anyway at the time, but I think you would agree, Mark, that you certainly would not want to be making any early move to pull it out, would you? Mr Burgess: It was amended, as you know, a couple of years ago, in that it used to be in both directions, and now it is peak direction only, but I agree that the last thing you want to do is pull it out. It is at least affording some benefit for the buses, but logic says that the most congested part of any bus’s journey is the closest part to the city, so if we ever had money for bus priority on some arterial roads, we would start from the city and work out, probably. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Are you able to guarantee that the three per cent efficiency dividend will not lead to any reduction in Transperth services? Is it possible to deliver that three per cent dividend without a reduction in Transperth services? Mr Waldock: It is fair to say that, from our point of view, we are still working our way through that, in terms of what it means. Three per cent was not on all of our budget; it has been adjusted, as you would expect, for certain things including interest rates and the like, and depreciation, but certainly, from our point of view, we are still attempting. We have not gone back to the government yet—I can unequivocally say that—with our views on whether it is achievable or not, and what would need to happen. I think it is too early to make comment, because we have not actually, as I

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 24 say, responded to government in terms of whether there are services that would need to be reduced. Perhaps in a month’s time that question might be more useful. Hon KEN TRAVERS: I am not asking you to nominate the services, or how you do it; I guess my question is more in a broad general sense of whether it is possible to achieve three per cent without a reduction in services. Mr Waldock: I think it will certainly be a challenge. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Can you tell me how many security guards you currently have employed— both your own and privately employed—and what the break-up is between those? I cannot think of the names of the two different categories. I think there are revenue protection officers and security personnel. The CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps you would like to take that on notice. Mr Waldock: I might take that on notice. It is a very good question, and I normally would have had that answer. I will come back with a detailed answer, but perhaps in a general sense, I think we are still about 100 down. I suppose the good news is that we have not been suffering the same haemorrhaging in terms of people moving out of transit officer jobs over the past few months, and we think that indeed to some extent we will see a more stable environment in terms of numbers. The big issue for us has always been recruitment. We have actually had enormous issues in recruiting over three years, despite enormous efforts in terms of target marketing, promotion, even down to shopping centres, radio—you name it, we have done it. We have had difficulties. We have gone from 30 or 35 people to a school down to about six or seven people to a school, so it has been difficult. I think that will improve, with the tighter economic times, and as that does improve, and we are able to recruit more, the revenue protection officers—the private Chubb people—will be reduced accordingly. Hon KEN TRAVERS: So you do not have an idea of what percentage are private revenue protection officers? Mr Waldock: I think it is probably two transit officers to one private security officer. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Is the rate of incidents of violence against those officers on the increase, or on the decrease? Mr Waldock: Our numbers show that it has actually reduced in recent times. That could be a reflection of their strength as officers. The level of assaults has reduced in recent times. That could be a function as much of the fact that we have not had the same coverage. We do not get anywhere near the issues with revenue protection people, because they have not got the same powers, and you do not have the same issues arising often. In fact, I think it has been a good news story in terms of security generally, since the past 12 months, when we have put a lot of effort into security in terms of CCTV and real-time monitoring. [10.40 am] We now have what we call an X plan, where officers actually stick to their own lines and their own customers. What we have seen is from the customers’ perspective, our market research indicates that perceptions of safety on the rail system have improved significantly. There was about a six or seven per cent—it may be eight per cent; I have those numbers somewhere—increase in improved perceptions. Buses went the other way. Hon KEN TRAVERS: Do you break that up by line? Mr Waldock: No, we do not, but we could in fact break it up by line. We have put more effort into things like the Armadale line, where there are issues. If you look at what has happened on the trains, we think it has improved quite substantially. We have had a very significant—I think it was seven to eight per cent—improvement in perceptions of safety. There have been some good signs. On

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 25 trains, 71 per cent of people felt safe, and that has increased to 78 per cent. That is a very good reflection of the extra work we have been doing. At the same time, I must say that buses went the opposite way. The CHAIRPERSON: Was that daytime or evening? Mr Waldock: Daytime it is always about 98 per cent. This is night time, where we have real issues, but the perception of our customers has increased substantially over that period. As I have said, unfortunately buses have gone the opposite way, for lots of different reasons. It is a difficult issue. The CHAIRPERSON: I just indicate that we will need to stop shortly because the house will be sitting at 11 o’clock. There might be one further question from Mr Travers. Hon KEN TRAVERS: I am interested to know how you are going with the bus route into and out of Cockburn station. There are also issues about access into Joondalup station as a result of the shopping centre closing at night. If you could give me a quick answer to both those questions, that would be good. Mr Waldock: At Joondalup, we are again talking to the shopping centre owners. It is a concern to us that they have closed off that access. That means that the connection for people coming from that area is not good. All I can say is that we will continue to work on that. They have got the powers and we have not got the powers, so it is an issue of further consultation and, hopefully, getting some agreement on how we might do that. That is a work in progress to my knowledge. In terms of Cockburn station, I saw that come up again in the paper on the weekend, about the tunnel and how we are using it. That is another issue where the shopping centre owners have got the ultimate say, and we can coerce and attempt to seduce them, but to date it has not been easy, so that is ongoing. The CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. I think Mr Travers has some other questions that he might put on notice. Is that correct? Hon KEN TRAVERS: Yes. I will provide them to the clerk later today. I will pull out the questions that I have already asked and bring it down to the ones that I still want to ask questions about. The CHAIRPERSON: That is a good idea. Thank you very much for your time this morning. I appreciate that. Mr Waldock: Thank you. Hearing concluded at 10.42 am ______

Estimates and Financial Operations Tuesday, 9 December 2008 Page 26