Question no.: 50
Division/Agency: (IA) Infrastructure Australia
Topic: Stirling Alliance
Proof Hansard Page/s: 15 (14/02/2012)
Senator Ludlam asked:
Senator LUDLAM: Can you give us a rundown on why the priority list excluded the proposal from the Stirling Alliance?
Mr Deegan: We publish our analyses. I have met with the Stirling Alliance and, in my view, there is need, as is in most states, to think through the network impact across these various proposals. Often the proposals are localised and dealing with immediate issues, and often provide an answer to the wrong question. What is the problem that the Stirling Alliance is seeking to address-I use Stirling as an example but for a generic approach-what are the issues that they are seeking to resolve and why is their answer the best option to resolve that, particularly when there is a lot of money involved? That is the discussion we have been having with Stirling Alliance and others: firstly, how does this work on a network impact, in Perth and its environs; why that project against others; and what is the problem they are seeking to resolve and why is their particular solution the best one? That has been a very sensible discussion with the Stirling Alliance.
Senator LUDLAM: Is that one of the ones that stayed on the table; would you qualify that as in your list of nine or 10 that are being collaboratively worked through, or has it been withdrawn?
Mr Deegan: I would have to check the status of that.
The Stirling Alliance proposal was not recommended for the priority list in 2010-11 for the reasons articulated on page 15 of the Hansard transcript.
The proponent did not submit an updated proposal in 2011-12.