Mr GAFFNEY (Mersey) - Mr President, I rise to speak on the issue which will be of special interest to members in this place as a similar situation could actually occur in your electorate and I would like you to be aware of what has occurred.

As members may be aware, the Government has proposed to build an overpass at Leith which will require the compulsory acquisition of a number of homes. Liaising with the residents' group, it is clear there has been significant disappointment in and disagreement with the Government consultation process and the stated factors and statistics used to formulate and justify the overpass proposal. I have offered to share their concerns for the benefit of these members. Quoting from a document from Mr Leo Beuermann with respect to the consultation process he states:

In 2017-18, consultations evidenced many residents preferred a speed reduction or a roundabout instead of an overpass.

Leith residents were excluded from and unaware of the multi-criteria analysis' other consultations with stakeholders between 2018 and March 2021. Those having homes and land taken for this proposed overpass received no notification until March of 2021, despite survey work conducted in late 2020. The July 2021 consultations were flawed in design and written to favour an overpass. The Department of State Growth staff were unable to answer many questions asked by attendees and presentation of materials did not adequately provide information of other safety options, such as a speed reduction or roundabout. Feedback forms were biased with loaded questions where two overpass designs are the only choices whilst other options were for discussion only. A set-to-fail roundabout design at Short Street with a limited value was presented, whilst a viable roundabout at Leith Road proposed by residents was not presented to residents or attendees, although this design works at Howth.

These government and Department of State Growth (DSG) consultations and website presentations were publicly criticised in the Advocate newspaper by an internationally acclaimed expert on social infrastructure.

Mr President, I have previously raised questions regarding the quoted crash statistics which have been given as a partial justification for the need to build the overpass. The residents' group has asked me to reiterate their view that the stated figures are not correct and that: 'There have only been 26 crashes at the Leith junctions in the last 20 years and no fatalities are attributable to these intersections'.

Indeed, the school bus no longer uses the route which originally caused the concern at that junction. Furthermore, the residents have concerns with the limited DSG field study undertaken with regard to the environmental issues. They believe that the impact on the health of the Forth River Estuary and on endangered flora and fauna has not been appropriately examined, and call on the Department of State Growth to undertake further research.

Mr Beuermann's document also raises the question of new dangers from the overpass. He says:

The Government-preferred overpass design or alternative design both create new additional dangerous intersections where potential for injury or death is migrated from the highway to any overpass, ramps and Leith Road as well as back to existing slip lanes on the highway. Both options mean vehicles entering and exiting North Leith must travel across a dangerously located un signaled railway crossing whilst the other option also provides an entry to North Leith by requiring traffic to cross over a new slip lane towards Devonport, creating extremely dangerous situations and major potential for crashes.

The Government claims an overpass with slip lanes was chosen due to a strong desire by the community; however, the finally released 2018 Outcomes Report reveals a mere 10.1% support for an overpass with slip lanes, compared with overwhelming support for a speed reduction or roundabout.

Mr Beuermann and the residents' group called on the Government to consider other design alternatives. He states that: 'Speed reduction is readily achievable as is a roundabout at far less cost than any overpass'.

I am cognisant that the creation of large-scale infrastructure often involves the acquisition of private homes and property. However, I cannot imagine what it must be like to contemplate the loss of one's home.

A local petition now has close to 4000 signatures condemning the Government's push to evict people from their homes, probably compounded more with the current housing market situation of trying to find a new home within a certain value range. Additionally, the residents have concerns for the impact on the peaceful enjoyment of the properties in the vicinity, and indeed of the potential negative effect on property values.

Mr Beuermann states:

Homes not taken for an overpass face significant loss of amenity, reduction of value, so they become virtually unliveable due to their close proximity. This loss or damage includes overshadowing, overlooking, emission pollution, noise pollution and dangerous exits to some homes.

The taking of homes and land for an overpass makes these residents Collateral Damage for a monolithic overpass where its width of 13.8 metres funnels onto Bridge Street and Leith Road which are both only 6 metres wide.

There will be significant increase in traffic using Bridge Street and aN un-signaled railway crossing. Any overpass could result in more homes being taken or any overpass being built further onto the endangered river bank where either option causes irreversible damage and huge costs.

A regional development expert, Professor Robyn Eversole, wrote:

This is the dark face of regional development: when the project takes over and people and communities become collateral damage. Instead of infrastructure to improve our region we get the opposite: a white elephant few want at a cost we all bear.

The actual figure bandied for this overpass is somewhere between $15-$20 million. The residents believe that it could be done for much less value and in a much safer way.

Mr President, I hope that bringing members' attention to this matter might assist in generating support for the residents of Leith and their endeavours to have the Government revisit this most controversial project.

It also should be noted that a number of government projects are being undertaken which I believe seem to lack authentic and genuine consultation.