Page 536 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 13 February 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Each week there are typically over 80 specific requests covering footpaths and cyclepaths, ranging from requests for new paths to repairs of existing paths. Over the last three years, a total of 4,500 requests have been recorded by TAMS covering footpaths and cyclepaths. As a new minister, I can tell Mr Wall that it is eye opening to see just how many requests come across my desk, as is the volume of work that TAMS does to assess and respond to them. As with anything, the merit of these requests also varies.
Once a request has been received, it is inspected, the priority for attention assessed and then it is included in the system for repair and or replacement. As I am sure Mr Wall can appreciate, the length of time between identification of a footpath or shared path in need of attention and the actual work will be based on the assessment of the priority for repair, serviceability of the existing path and its location. Perhaps as a current example, members may have noticed over the weekend the impact of the Multicultural Festival through some parts of Civic with the forklifts moving around to put in the tents and the like. We have seen quite some damage to the paving through various parts of Civic, and that is scheduled to be repaired tomorrow because it is such a high-use area and, therefore, presents such a high level of risk. I have spoken to the agency and we are getting on to that one straightaway. I think that demonstrates how that prioritisation system works.
In that vein, I guess the formal answer is that any urgent requests that pose a public safety risk are made safe within 48 hours of receipt of the request, while more routine requests for repairs are packaged and tendered over the year. Typically, it can take between one and 12 months for requests to be addressed depending on the priority, the location and whether the existing paths are safe and serviceable. At any one time there are about 1,000 requests in the TAMS management system.
While this information currently resides within the TAMS management system, as Mr Wall has alluded to in his comments, it would take considerable time and effort to present it in a way that would be useful to the general public on a website. That would be a significant drain on resources. While I think the request and the intent of the motion is to make public as much information as possible—and transparency of government processes is something I advocate—it would be difficult to publish all the specifics about repairs and maintenance of our enormous path network. To be honest, I would rather focus those resources on actually improving the network and to having them repaired and improved in a reasonable time and being responsive to the public need.
Having looked into it, I think we can take some reasonable steps that will make more information available to the public. TAMS manages many repairs by packaging them and going out to tender. At any point in time, there are about 350 locations that are packaged for this purpose. My view is that this information would be more useful to the general community.
At 6 pm, in accordance with standing order 34, the debate was interrupted. The motion for the adjournment of the Assembly having been put and negatived, the debate was resumed.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video