WA government keeps Matilda Bay ferry terminal plan despite safety warnings from opponents

Perth's Matilda Bay is the planned site for a new ferry terminal that would connect services to Elizabeth Quay and an Applecross landing as part of the Metronet program. The Western Australian Planning Commission approved Matilda Bay in December, and the project carries a price tag cited as $29.9 million.

Matilda Bay is a busy recreational area used by swimmers, students and people taking part in water sports. Opponents say putting a high-frequency ferry service into that environment increases the risk of collisions and injuries. Supporters, including the state government, argue the site can remain safe if specific design and operating changes are made.

• Safety on Swan, an advocacy group opposed to the Matilda Bay location, commissioned risk assessor Paul Chivers of Riskfacilitator. His review found introducing frequent ferry movements into a complex recreational waterway would create "serious risk" to children, novice sailors and other water users, arguing people in the water would be too close to ferries.

• The government's analysis — referenced by Transport Minister Rita Saffioti — assessed environmental, operating, waterway safety and public transport criteria and concluded Matilda Bay is the safest feasible site if adjustments are applied.

• Move the terminal to an alternative site further along the foreshore near the closed JoJo's restaurant to provide greater physical separation between ferries and recreational users.
• Rely on design choice to reduce the need for continuous real-time risk management by individuals.

State government and Minister Saffioti:

• Keep Matilda Bay as the terminal location.
• Apply adjustments: create a wide exclusion zone where ferries cannot go, reduce ferry speeds in the bay, and extend the jetty out to about 40 metres so swimmers and children can remain close to shore safely.

Why JoJo's is rejected by the government

The government's assessment said JoJo's would carry "unacceptable safety risk" for windsurfers and kiteboarders because those sports are informal and harder to manage, and the ferry route there would intersect vessel traffic lanes in Melville Waters. The analysis also cited greater walking distance to the University of Western Australia, the presence of significant seagrass in a nearby marine park, and proximity to a "bush forever" site.

Construction has not started. The two reports point to different approaches: the campaigners want a site change to reduce design-stage risk, while the government is pursuing mitigation measures at Matilda Bay. The specific "adjustments" the government says are still being finalised will determine how many of the safety concerns can be addressed in practice.

• Details of the final safety and operating plan for Matilda Bay, including the size and enforcement of exclusion zones and speed limits.
• Any changes to the chosen site or formal responses to the Safety on Swan review.
• Timing for the start of construction and how the government plans to reconcile recreational access with ferry operations.